Town of New Boston
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
10/17/06
Approved 12/04/06
Members Present: Ed DiPietro, Greg Mattison, Chairman Dave Craig, Laura Todd, Clerk, Harry Piper, Bob Todd and Chris Golomb.
Chairman Craig opened the meeting @ 7:02PM.
Motion by Ed DiPietro to approve minutes from 09/19/06, 2nd by Greg Mattison, passed.
2006-4 “Appeal From An Administrative Decision” and “Area Variance”, application by Morgan Hollis, for Mr. & Mrs. Louis Rumore, Map 8, lot 77 and lot 78, 164 Bedford Road.
Harry Piper addressed the Zoning Board and audience, saying Atty. Hollis was a business and personal friend for years. If anyone was uncomfortable with him sitting on the board he would recuse himself. Dona Fairbairn, 143 Bedford Road made that request. Harry stepped down and left the meeting.
Chairman Craig explained this hearing was continued from 09/19/06 at the request of the applicant, the board would hear the “Appeal” portion of the application first. He then invited Atty. Hollis to address the board.
Attorney Morgan Hollis of Gottesman & Hollis, 39 East Pearl Street, Nashua, NH, For Louis and Marcia Rumore, 164 Bedford Road, Map 8, Lot 77 and Lot 78. Atty. Hollis said the Rumores have been receiving tax bills for two lots, paying taxes on two lots and the tax map shows two lots. When a building permit was req6uested for lot 77, they were advised the lot did not exist; it is part of lot 78. A letter was written on June 16, 2006, to ask for a determination that Lot 77 be declared a lawful, pre-existing, non-conforming lot of record. (see file for copy of letter) On July 18, 2006 the Selectmen wrote a response (see file for copy of letter), saying lot 77 does not have a legal existence that would support the treatment requested. Atty. Hollis asked that the ZBA reverse the
decision of the Selectmen. Atty. Hollis passed out packets to the board members, (see file-marked 10/17 handout) and reviewed the documents in the packets, as follows; (1.) letter to Selectmen from Louis Rumore (08/17/05) asking lot 77 be deemed a buildable house lot. (2.) Quitclaim Deed from Frederick Lorden Rev. Trust, Kenneth Lorden 2001 Trust, Francis Lorden Rev. Trust to Louis and Marcia Rumore (10/06/2005. (3.) Quitclaim Deed Frederick Lorden to Marcia and Louis Rumore (03/20/84) (4.) Quitclaim Deed Lorden Lumber Company, Inc. to Frederick Lorden (03/20/84). (5.) Meeting Minutes of N.B. Planning Board (02/25/86 re: Grenier property revised plans. (6.) Notice of Preliminary Assessment Values, lot 77 (08/30/06). (7.) list of New Boston values (04/01/98) (8.) Notice of Preliminary Assessment Values, lots 77 and 78. (07/98). (9.) Russell Keene & a.v. Town of Meredith court
case (05/23/79). (10.) 1990 Zoning Ordinance, copy of tax map, copy of map Bezanson – Lot. So, lot 77 has been shown separately for a long time, billed as a separate lot, deed in 1984 of lot 78 which references Bedford Road as it is today, deed of lot 77 with separate owners, plan in 1980 showing separate lots, road location in 1960’s, case of Russell Keene is important because it shows the same facts.
Bob Todd stated that the 1964 plan of the Lorden property shows the northern boundary as being the old location of the road. In the deed of Fred Lorden to Rumore in 1984 the description goes along the old location of the road.
Atty. H. Rumores then own that portion of Bedford Road.
Bob T., the deed from Lorden Lumber Co to Fred Lorden specifically reserved land between the old road and the new road, The Company held onto 1.5 acres 1984; deeded it to Rumore in 2005; the deed in 1984 created an illegal subdivision.
D. Craig asked when subdivision regulation came into effect? What creates a separate lot and road or deed?
Atty. H. an accumulation of factors is what determines, but our case is the relocation of the road created the lot.
D. Craig asked if we decide to deny the appeal, would we then hear the variance.
Atty. H. yes, then the applicant would go to the Planning Board to create this lot for subdivision.
Bob Todd spoke of 2 cases he was involved in that were similar to this case and he was required by the selectmen to go to Planning Board for an after-the-fact subdivision approval.
D. Craig asked if the ZBA upholds the Selectmen decision, if the owners could block Bedford Road?
Atty. Hollis, if road had been laid properly there would have been public notice, hearing, and town would have paid for land.
D. Craig, Town was not involved in creation of deeds.
Atty. Hollis, but deeds go on record (1986) that is why there was a deed in 2005, Town cannot have it both ways.
D. Craig asked to hear from the Selectmen.
Board of Selectmen, Chairman David Woodbury, spoke saying there were regulations as early as 1960’s, so we can’t assume there were no regulations when the road was relocated. If there was an agreement between Lorden Company and town, the town has no record. Bd has recently been approached due to road, a subdivision was created, the board is not inclined to see it as a back door subdivision. Asking about Rumore blocking the road, there was a letter saying that is what Rumore will do, so a challenge has been made. A suggestion has been made that some how the agreement between Lorden and New Boston was shown by the tax map, but the tax map was not created until 1980, how can that constitute a town and Lorden interest. This lot was sold to Rumore only recently.
D. Craig asked if the town’s position was that when lot 77 was sold to Rumore if it consolidated the lots.
D. Woodbury said the town has not expressed an opinion. Bob Todd, in 1984 an illegal subdivision was created, but not because of the road.
D. Craig asked notice abutters to speak.
Dona Fairbairn of 143 Bedford Road showed a colored map she had created. In 1988, they purchased 7.4 acres and understood the property line went to the middle of the old road. The realtor conveyed the story of the new road.
Kim Burkhamer (town assessor office) said she researched the records from 1930 until the present and there was no mention of a discontinuance of old road, only a widening and straightening near Salada land in 1950. There was also nothing in the selectmen minutes.
D, Craig asked the significance of this.
Bob Todd , if a road has not been discontinued, the property lines are shown by a surveyor as going along the edge of right of way and not to middle of road. However if a road has been discontinued surveyors show the property line going to center of old road.
Judy McLane 4 Pheasant Lane, said her comments would have more to do with the building.
Chris Misiorski, 18 pheasant Lane asked definition of lot of record. When Pheasant lane was developed, that lot (77) was shown with the note “believed to be part of lot 78”.
D. Craig asked who developed Pheasant Lane.
Bob Todd said Mo Grenier.
Atty. Hollis asked for a continuance, so he could get an affidavit from Lorden and dig deeper for answers. He also requested same members sit on continued heaing.
D. Craig asked Selectmen Woodbury if Town Counsel had been asked for an opinion. And of the ZBA has the capacity to ask for an opinion on our own.
Dave Woodbury was reluctant to give the ZBA an answer.
A motion to continue the hearing to November 21, @ 7PM, was made by Ed DiPietro, 2nd by Bob Todd and passed.
Motion to adjourn by Ed, 2nd by Bob, passed @ 8:25PM
Respectfully submitted
Laura Todd
10/20/06
Approved 12/04/06
| 
