Minutes of Town Board Meetings
- Planning Board
- Board of Adjustment
- Select Board
- Budget Committee
- Building Committee
- Energy Commission
Search Minutes of Town Board Meetings
2012 Board of Adjustment Archives
- Minutes of 6/14/2012 APPROVED
- Minutes of 7/12/2012 DRAFT
- Minutes of 6/14/2012 DRAFT
- Minutes of 5/10/2012 APPROVED
- Minutes of 4/12/2012 APPROVED
- Minutes of 5/10/2012 DRAFT
- Minutes of 4/12/2012 DRAFT
- Minutes of 3/8/2012 DRAFT
- 02-09-2012 Draft Minutes
- 01-03-2012 Approved ZBA Minutes
- 02-09-12 ZBA Agenda
- 01-03-2012 DRAFT ZBA MINUTES
Older Archives
01-03-2012 DRAFT ZBA MINUTES
January 5th, 2012
Carroll Board of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes January 3, 2012
DRAFT
“These minutes of The Town of Carroll Board of Adjustment have been recorded by its Secretary. Though believed to be accurate and correct they are subject to additions, deletions, and corrections by The Board of Adjustment at its next meeting when the Board votes its final approval of the minutes. They are being made available at this time to conform to the requirements of New Hampshire RSA 91-A:2”
Members of the Board present: Joan Karpf, Leslie Bergum, Paul Bussiere
Members of the Public present: Jeanne Stapleton
Minutes taken by Rena Vecchio, Secretary
Meeting called to order at 7:00 pm.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Chairperson Joan Karpf opened the meeting with an Application for a Variance for Jim and Jeanne Stapleton, Route 3 North, Twin Mountain, NH. The main purpose for this variance is to deal with setbacks. The application was read over by the board and all agreed the paperwork was filled out properly.
Joan started by saying this lot, Map 205, Lot 4, is a nonconforming lot. The front setbacks required would be thirty feet (30’) and the Stapleton’s are looking for a twelve foot (12’) setback. Jeanne Stapleton explained that her land is shaped like a bowtie with a driveway that was put in when Route 3 was changed. If the Stapleton’s were to build a home where all the setbacks would be met, they would have a three hundred foot (300’) driveway and their home and the 2 abutting homes would be all together. If they were to build the home where they want, the driveway would be much shorter but the front setback would be the twelve feet (12’).
Leslie Bergum made a motion to: accept the Application for a Variance from Jim & Jeanne Stapleton, Route 3 North, Twin Mountain, NH, Map 205, Lot 4, as written. Paul Bussiere seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
With the acceptance of the Variance Application, Chairperson Karpf opened the Public Hearing for the Variance at 7:16 pm. Joan said she wants to make sure that Jeanne understands that because there are only 3 members on the board right now, all 3 members
ZBA MINUTES 01/03/2012 Page 1
need to vote yes or the motion will fail. Paul Bussiere said her only other option is to wait until March when the Town will vote in 3 new members to the ZBA.
The Chairperson said she had contacted DOT to see what their concerns might be. She explained that old Route 3 was where the sidewalk is now. The grass way along there now is the DOT’s right-of-way (ROW). She said DOT had only two concerns:
1. There could be no backing onto Route 3.
2. There could be no parking on the ROW.
There was no public present to ask questions, so the Chair closed the Public Hearing.
Paul Bussiere asked about the lot size and told it was .7 acres. Joan said that is what makes it a non-conforming lot. Paul said he has two thoughts going and would like to discuss it. He said we have a non-conforming lot and an application in front of us to vote in a non-conforming setback. The applicants have the ability to place that home in an area on the lot that would conform with the zoning regulations. However, that leaves the Stapleton’s with a very long, 300’ driveway. Joan said she was thinking of this also. She said the purpose of a variance is to help property owners to utilize their land. The variance shows the flexibility to help the landowners. The Chair said that Jeanne has asked for a variance in the setbacks but has also shown where a house could be placed within the setbacks. Now the board has to state what the hardship is to allow the variance.
Paul said he is looking at the existing location of the driveway. Leslie read that “when the characteristics of the particular land in question makes it different from others, can unnecessary hardship be claimed.” She said that the land in question has a unique shape and that the 300’ driveway makes for a hardship to put the house within the setbacks.
Paul said he agrees with that. Joan said she also agrees with that and will go over the facts in granting the variance:
1. Granting the variance would not be contrary to the public interest because: there is substantial distance from the house and Route 3 and the ROW is such that there is no safety issue to the public.
2. If the variance were granted, the spirit of the ordinance would be observed because: there is still ample setback from the existing roadway and homes around it.
3. Granting the variance would do substantial justice because: there is an approved existing driveway. To place the house in another area would require an unreasonable length for the driveway because of the unique long shape of the property.
ZBA MINUTES 01/03/2012 Page 2
4. If the variance were granted, the values of the surrounding properties would not be diminished because: there is substantial distance from the abutting homes and properties in the area. Also, the back and side setbacks are met.
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
purpose of the ordinance provision and the specific application of
that provision to the property because: there is a uniqueness in the
special design of the Stapleton property, the unique shape of the property
and length due to the move of Route 3 by DOT and the permitted DOT
driveway.
ii. The proposed use is a reasonable one because: of the unique size of the
ROW and the location of the house.
Leslie Bergum made a motion to: approve the Variance for Jim and Jeanne Stapleton, Route 3 North, Twin Mountain, NH, Map 205, Lot 4, with these conditions:
• There is to be no parking on the right-of-way.
• There is to be ample radius to turn around in the driveway so there will be no backing out onto Route 3. Paul Bussiere seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
Paul Bussiere made a motion to: accept the minutes of March 10, 2011 as written. Leslie Bergum seconded and the motion passed with 2 ayes and 1abstention as Joan Karpf was not at the meeting.
Paul Bussiere made a motion to: adjourn the meeting. Leslie Bergum seconded and the motion passed unanimously.