ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
January 30, 2014
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.
Roll Call: Larry Ordway, Chair
Timothy Fisher, Vice Chair
James Allen
Paul Boniface
Martha Sumner, Alternate
M. Sumner was appointed as a voting member for this meeting.
Minutes of December 05, 2013 Meeting
L. Ordway moved, second by T. Fisher, to approve the minutes of the December 05, 2013 meeting. There was no discussion on the motion and the vote was 3-0-2 (Boniface and Allen abstaining).
#14-01: A request from Julian Kiszka for a variance from Article V, §220-32I to allow the installation of three (3) solar PV top-of-pole arrays twelve (12) feet from the front property line where thirty-five (35) feet is the minimum required. The property is located at 1 May Ray Ave, Tax Map 40, Lot 96 in the CII District. The applicant is the property owner of record.
Heath Sargent, Harmony Energy Works (Harmony) and Julian and Barbara Kiszka, property owners, were present for the application.
H. Sargent noted the following for the Board in support of the application:
- Seeking a corrected variance for an error in measurement that was discovered after construction began
- The original measurements were taken from edge of pavement, not from the property line, which made the project six (6) feet closer
- The error was discovered when the bushes were installed and the location noted by the Highway Department
- The new variance is for twelve (12) feet
- The drawings submitted with the original application showed the setback from the edge of pavement and wasn’t disputed by the Building Department
L. Ordway questioned why Harmony would not have done a survey to make sure of their measurements prior to submitting an application.
H. Sargent offered that they were not contesting the location; it was a good faith error.
L. Ordway asked how the Highway Department became involved.
H. Sargent offered that it came to light with reference to the location of bushes and snowplowing.
L. Ordway asked if the arrays were an issue for the snowplows.
H. Sargent said they were not, the arrays were placed well away from where the plows would push the snow and even the shrubs aren’t really a plowing issue. He added that no locations of anything were changing; they just knew the correct distance now.
L. Ordway asked what that cost would be to relocate the arrays to comply with the variance that was previously granted.
H. Sargent replied that it would mean the complete dismantling and reconstruction of the arrays which would be between $30,000 and $40,000 for labor and equipment. He added that the reason they applied for the variance to locate the arrays where they are is because they are in a “sweet spot” for the best collection of sunlight. Mr. Sargent noted that if they had know the correct distance at the time of the first variance application then they would have applied for this distance at that time.
T. Fisher asked if the Highway Department had any issues with the location of the array or the bushes.
H. Sargent noted that it turns out the bushes are located on the property.
B. Kiszka offered that it has snowed since the solar array and bushes were installed and there was no problem with the plowing.
T. Fisher asked what happens if the bushes do get damaged.
H. Sargent said that the property owners were accepting that responsibility.
L. Ordway suggested that it be written into the decision that if there is a mammoth snowstorm and the bushes are damaged or destroyed when plowing then there is no liability for the Town.
L. Ordway asked how deep the electrical trench was related to the arrays.
H. Sargent noted that it was six (6) feet deep.
L. Ordway asked why so deep.
H. Sargent offered that it was due to regulations governing conduit.
L. Ordway asked if the Board had any additional questions. There were none. He asked if the applicant had anything else they wanted the Board to know.
H. Sargent noted that the arrays would be located in the same place, because it was the best location for their functioning. He added that it was an honest mistake in measuring and they wanted to be compliant.
L. Ordway asked if there was anyone speaking in favor of the application.
B. Kiszka noted that it was inspected before the concrete was poured and if they have to pull it out it will mean more disturbances to the wetlands.
L. Ordway asked if there was anyone speaking in opposition to the application. There was no one and the matter was closed.
DELIBERATIONS
#14-01: A request from Julian Kiszka for a variance from Article V, §220-32I to allow the installation of three (3) solar PV top-of-pole arrays twelve (12) feet from the front property line where thirty-five (35) feet is the minimum required. The property is located at 1 May Ray Ave, Tax Map 40, Lot 96 in the CII District. The applicant is the property owner of record.
T. Fisher moved, second by M. Sumner to grant the application for a variance from Article V. §220-32I and all the installation of three (3) solar PV top-of-pole arrays twelve (12) feet from the front property line where thirty-five (35) feet is the minimum required. The property is located at 1 May Ray Ave, Tax Map 40, Lot 96 in the CII District. The applicant is the property owner of record. Should there be any damages to the structure or the landscaping as a result of winter snow removal the Town will not be held liable for that damage.
L. Ordway summarized the application as follows:
- It was a good faith mistake
- Harmony assumed they were talking about a survey property line when they indicated that they measured from edge of pavement on their permit application
- The error was not caught administratively before the building permit was issued and the property owner should not be penalized now
There was no further discussion on the motion. The vote was 4-1-0 (Allen dissenting)
There was no further business before the Board. The meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Dee Voss
Administrative Assistant
| 
