Online Services

Online Vehicle Registration Renewal Online Property Tax, Water & Sewer payments Online Dog License Renewals Vital Record Request
GIS & Property Database

View of Carroll from Sugarloaf

Minutes of Town Board Meetings

Search Minutes of Town Board Meetings

2019 Board of Adjustment Archives

Older Archives

Minutes of 10/22/2019

November 7th, 2019

Special Public Hearing
October 22, 2019

Members Present: Chair Aaron Foti, Vice-Chair Andy Smith, Janet Nelson and Dianne Hogan
Public: Mike Petrosus, Profile Deluxe Motel, Applicant
Minutes taken by: Judy Ramsdell
Pledge of Allegiance: 7:01 p.m.
Approval of Minutes

Chairman Aaron Foti asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes of the September 5, 2019 Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting. There were none.
Andy Smith made a motion to approve the minutes of September 5, 2019. Janet Nelson seconded the motion, and the motion passed with 3 ayes and Dianne Hogan abstained as she was not in attendance at the September 5, 2019 meeting.

Chairman Aaron Foti told Mr. Petrosus that he has the right to not accept the judgment of the Board tonight, as we do not have a full board in attendance. We do have four members in attendance, which is a quorum. Mr. Petrosus said he would like to continue with the meeting.
Chairman Aaron Foti asked Mr. Petrosus to walk the ZBA through the application. Mr. Petrosus said he wanted to clarify that it is not a cement pad for a shed but actually a gravel pad. A variance is requested from Article 403, Section 4 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the installation of a 12x16 shed, 14 feet from the front setback. They are looking at expanding for storage of supplies. It will provide much-needed space for supplies for the motel. Currently everything is stored in a small garage and it is difficult to get to the supplies. They are looking for easier access to get materials for the motel. They are applying to have a shed in the back of the house. The house is closer to the road than the shed will be. It will be easier to get to the shed from the house and motel. Mr. Petrosus said that Dave Scalley showed them how far back the 40 feet setback would be and that would put the shed in the middle of the back of the house where there is a septic system and leach fields. They don’t want to place the shed on their septic system and/or leach fields. Mr. Petrosus said further back toward the wood line the grade is very steep and it would not work there. Mr. Petrosus said the shed will actually be 50 feet from the state right of way and it will be 14 feet from the front setback instead of the required 40 feet. This would put the shed 64 feet from the state yellow line. He has the state’s 50 feet plus an additional 14 feet. The house was built in 1936 and the motel was constructed in 1956. The shed will be going between the two pieces of fencing. He did give a drawing of the shed with the google map view to Mrs. Vecchio. Mr. Smith had a google view on his phone which the members viewed. It will flow with the landscape of the property. The gravel pad is already there. It was noted that there were not any abutters in attendance at the hearing. The side setbacks are o.k. All the setbacks are met except for the one coming from the front.
The Chair opened the Public Hearing to the Board. Janet Nelson said it seems like the hardship is the septic system. It does look like there are other places to put up a shed. Mr. Petrosus said from a convenience standpoint, it would not make sense to put it anywhere else. He said between the hotel and the office building is extra parking for their customers so it can’t go further that way. In the back of the hotel is a yard and some is a wood line, but they have a trail set up out back that they use for scavenger hunts for their guests.
Chairman Aaron Foti said that is will be basically seamless. The shed is going in between the two fences and in front of the fences there are two big rocks that are landscaped. Mr. Petrosus said they want to tie it in and make it one continuous garden with plants and bushes and it will take a year or two for that to all grow up. The access is going to be from their yard. The shed is already pre-built and painted.
The Board asked Mr. Petrosus if this doesn’t work, where else could it possibly go. Mr. Petrosus said they will have to cross that bridge when they come to it. They are currently jammed up in their current storage space. It will be convenient for the motel business to have the storage shed right out the back door. Mr. Petrosus said if they got denied they probably wouldn’t go with it. They might try to expand off the back of the garage or make room in their basement. Those locations would not be the most convenient. It is something he and his wife would have to discuss. The supplies that will be stored are motel supplies that they need access to daily. There is a vegetable garden out back that is partially over the leach field. He doesn’t want to put anything up over the leach field or septic system in case something happened to those and the shed would have to be removed. They are trying to make things easier for them to run the motel. They do a lot of their business in the winter and they need the spaces for their guest’s snowmobile trailers. They don’t want it located too far away in the woods, which would make access difficult. This shed will be used everyday.
The Public Hearing closed at 7:21 pm. The Board moved to deliberations where they discuss the application and come to a decision.
Chairman Aaron Foti said the challenge we are always up against is proving there is Unnecessary Hardship tied to the land. Aaron said he would say there are some unique characteristics, the age of the existing house and motel and the fact those have been grandfathered. One avenue to look for would be the septic, but that is a gray area, it is not a natural characteristic, but we are not looking to tell people to move their septic systems either. An alternative point of view is there are five acres there and other places the shed could go, but there are personal hardships associated with those.
Janet Nelson said her feeling on the hardship is the septic. They have both winter as well as summer activities at the motel. Those activities are good for the whole town and community, and we do not want the shed to interfere with their trails and snowmobiling. We don’t want them to locate the shed where it will be difficult to access, especially with the hard winters we have here. Janet said she doesn’t have a problem saying there would be hardship to move their leach field and septic system. The house was built in 1936 and the motel in 1956. This shed will be blended in with the fence and landscaping. It is not going to be an eyesore. It is not going to be non-conforming at all with the look of the area and other things in town.
Dianne Hogan said she is good with it.
Vice Chair Andy Smith said that we strive for reasons to help people use their land. Initially he had a hard time with it, as there are other places to put the shed. The practical part of where it has to go is with grandfathered structures closer to the road. It includes the office of the motel, not just the house. Andy said locating the shed in another location on the property would not be a functional shed for them to get supplies out of daily on a year-round basis. Mr. Petrosus said all of the five acres is not cleared, and the shed is for supplies for their guests. They are just trying to keep it simple.
The Board reviewed each of the criteria for granting the variance.
1. Granting the variance would not be contrary to the public interest because:
There is no adverse affect on the public interest as a result of this project. The shed will be placed further back than the existing home and will be used for storing supplies for the motel. Andy Smith made a motion that this application would not be contrary to the public interest. The motion was seconded by Chairman Aaron Foti. All in favor,
4-0. Motion passed.
2. If the variance were granted, the spirit of the ordinance would be observed because:
The shed would flow with the landscape of the property. The whole idea of having the setback is we want to create space to operate in the front of the business. The existing structures are separated from the road by the pool. A motion was made by Aaron Foti that the spirit of the ordinance is in force with this variance. The motion was seconded by Andy Smith. All in favor, 4-0. Motion passed.
3. Granting the variance would do substantial justice because:
We don’t want to interfere with the activities that go on at the motel for the guests. We want people here in our community. It does not create a loss to the public, it is actually a gain. A motion was made by Aaron Foti that granting the various would do substantial justice. The motion was seconded by Dianne Hogan. All in favor, 4-0. Motion passed.
4. If the variance were granted, the values of the surrounding properties would not be diminished because:
The shed will be property maintained with landscaping and additionally this setback is a front setback not a side setback. The abutter is the state and the highway out front. There are not any diminished values. A motion was made by Aaron Foti that if the variance were granted the values of the surrounding properties would not be diminished. The motion was seconded by Andy Smith. All in favor, 4-0. Motion passed.
5. Unnecessary Hardship
A. Owing to special conditions of the property that distinguish it from other properties in the area, denial of the variance would result in unnecessary hardship because:
i. No fair and substantial relationship exists between the general public purposes of the ordinance provision and the specific application of that provision to the property because:
The shed will be used for private use and not interfere with the septic system. It is the only logical place for the shed to be located so it will be near the house and office and will be accessed daily for motel supplies.
ii. The proposed use is a reasonable one because:
This will help create much-needed space for supplies to run the motel. It is perfectly reasonable and the Board can see the hardship is not outweighed by the public interest to put it closer to the motel.
B. Explain how, if the criteria in subparagraph (A) are not established, an unnecessary hardship will be deemed to exist if, and only if, owing to special conditions of the property that distinguish it from other properties in the area, the property cannot be reasonably used in strict conformance with the ordinance, and a variance is therefore necessary to enable a reasonable use of it.
Denying the variance would not allow the property to be reasonably used. The other options for the shed location would be much more challenging and there is no reason for the Board to force that direction.
A motion was made by Andy Smith that the criteria meets Items 5a & 5b. The motion was seconded by Aaron Foti. All in favor, 4-0. Motion passed.
A motion was made by Aaron Foti that we approve the application for a Variance from Profile Deluxe Motel, 580 Route 3 South, Map 207-026-000-001, under Article 4, Section 403.4, for setbacks as presented. The motion was seconded by Janet Nelson. All in favor, 4-0. Motion passed.
Chairman Foti told Mr. Petrosus that he will receive a signed decision. There is a 30-day appeal period by anyone who has standing so anything he does in the next 30 days is at your risk. An abutter, the Planning Board, the Board of Selectmen, the Building Inspector could appeal the decision.

Chairman Aaron Foti made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Janet Nelson seconded the motion. All in favor, 4-0. Motion passed.