8/7/2013 - Meeting Minutes

Moderator: Maria Lajoie

8/7/2013 - Meeting Minutes

Postby Maria Lajoie » Wed Oct 16, 2013 1:55 pm

The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm.

ATTENDANCE
Present: Daniel Heney (Chairman), Pamela Holmes (Vice Chairman), Sean Holland, Leonard Demers, John Bombara, Adelle Reynolds (Building Commissioner) and Maria Lajoie (Administrative Secretary).

REORGANIZATION:
1. A Motion was made by Mr. Bombara to appoint Daniel Heney as Chairman, seconded by Ms. Holmes. Vote: Unanimous.
2. A Motion was made by Mr. Bombara to appoint Pamela Holmes as Vice Chairman, seconded by Mr. Demers. Vote: Unanimous. Ms. Lajoie was asked to send a memo to the Board of Selectmen regarding the reorganization.

7:05 PM ZBA CASE #2013-04
PUBLIC HEARING: Gerald & Melissa Setzer
102 Southeast Main Street
Request for Variance
Member Sean Holland recused himself. Hearing this case is Daniel Heney, Pamela Holmes, Leonard Demers and John Bombara. Present were Owners Gerald & Melissa Setzer and abutter Sharon McKeon. The Owners are requesting a Variance in a Rural/Agricultural zoned area pursuant to Douglas Zoning Bylaws, Appendix B – Dimensional Requirements to vary the 25-foot right side yard setback to 9.6 and 21.2-foot side yard setback to construct a 24-foot by 28-foot garage with recreation room above addition to existing dwelling. The proposed garage/addition would be attached to the right side of the house and will be the same height of the existing house. Mr. Setzer said he could not put the garage on the left side of the house because there is a blind driveway. Mr. Heney stated that the Planning Board had no objection to this request for a Variance. The Board received a letter from abutter Ray Deorsey of 98 Southeast Main Street dated 7/28/13 opposing this Variance because the garage/recreation room would be too close to their bedrooms. Mr. Deorsey is also concerned with runoff water from the proposed roof would run down the existing banking into his yard and may end up in his basement after the saturation point is reached. Mr. Heney said that the proposed addition is 24-feet by 28-feet. Mr. Heney went to the site and said there is a lot of land in the rear of the existing house. Mr. Setzer said that the entrance is on the right side of the house and can’t get to the back of the house on the left side. Ms. Holmes said she went to the site also and saw that the proposed garage/addition would be very tight and too close to the neighbor. Mr. Heney suggested to Mr. Setzer to consider other alternatives. Mr. Bombara said he went to the site also and asked what size the shed was and Mr. Setzer said 10-feet by 12-feet and Mr. Bombara said he could move the shed. Ms. Reynolds said that the septic system is 48-feet from the rear of the house. Mr. Heney suggested that the proposed garage be moved further back and Mr. Setzer said he just put steps in to go to the kitchen and he can’t move them. Mr. Heney told Mr. Setzer that he has to meet the hardship criteria. Mr. Setzer said that the blind driveway on the left side is dangerous. Mr. Heney said that the Board must also protect the privacy of the abutters. Ms. Holmes said that if they were to grant this Variance, it would remain in perpetuity. Mr. Demers said that typically the Board would grant a Variance if it were for 10-15 feet from the boundary line but 9.6-feet from the side line is too close and agrees with Ms. Holmes that if it were granted it would be forever. Mr. Setzer said that he is thinking of the safety of his family due to the blind driveway on the left side. Ms. Holmes said that this house was built in 1975 prior to 2-acre zoning and is already a non-conforming lot. Mr. Bombara agrees with Ms. Holmes and suggested that Mr. Setzer push the garage/addition to the back or the left side because Mr. Setzer is asking the Board for too much of a side yard setback. Ms. Reynolds said that according to the Board of Health plan, the leach field is located in the back of the house to the left. Mr. Setzer said the septic system is located in the back of the house. Mr. Tom Gadbois, the Setzer’s Builder said he pushed the garage back as far as he could on the right side and this driveway is safe. Ms. Holmes asked what was located on the back left corner and Mr. Setzer said a bedroom and the living room. Ms. Holmes asked about the garage located underneath the house and Mr. Setzer said it was full. Mr. Heney explained the options to Mr. Setzer: if the Board denies the application, Mr. Setzer can re-apply in two years; Mr. Setzer can withdraw the application without prejudice or Mr. Setzer can ask for a continuance of the public hearing and come back to the Board with an alternative. Mrs. Setzer said she brought her next door neighbor Sharon McKeon of 104 Southeast Main Street, who has no objection to the Setzer’s garage/addition. Mrs. Setzer stated that if someone buys a house in the area then they should be fine with their property. Mr. Heney said that the Board considers what is best for the entire town and the plot plan that was submitted for the garage/addition is up against the lot line. Mr. Bombara suggested that the garage/addition be pushed back as far as they can. Mr. Heney asked Mr. Setzer if he wanted to continue the Public Hearing and come back with an alternative plan. Mr. Setzer said he would like to continue this hearing. Ms. Reynolds said that the Board needs the 4 members. Mr. Setzer said he would work with Ms. Reynolds on a revised plan. Mr. Setzer said he wants a blind drive sign placed on the left side of his property. The Board told him to speak to the Police Department. A Motion was made by Ms. Holmes to continue the Public Hearing on Wednesday, September 4, 2013 at 7:00pm, seconded by Mr. Demers. Vote: Unanimous.

DISCUSSION:
1. Meeting Minutes of 4/3/13. After review, a Motion was made by Mr. Holland to approve the Meeting Minutes of Wednesday, April 3, 2013, as written, seconded by Mr. Bombara. Vote: Unanimous.
2. Meeting Minutes of 6/5/13. After review, a Motion was made by Mr. Holland to approve the Meeting Minutes of Wednesday, June 5, 2013, as written, seconded by Mr. Bombara. Vote: Unanimous.
3. Alternate Members. Currently there are two openings for Alternate Members. The Board asked Ms. Lajoie to send a memo to the Board of Selectmen asking them to mention this at their meetings and Ms. Lajoie will also have the notice placed on cable.
4. Application Fees. Ms. Reynolds suggested that the Applicant be responsible to do the certified mailings to abutters but charge a flat fee for Applications. Mr. Bombara agreed with a flat fee for an Application Fee and the Applicant pay for the legal notice and the certified mailings. Ms. Holmes suggested a sliding scale fee depending on extent of an Application. Mr. Demers suggested an Application Fee of $250 plus $8 per abutter. Ms. Reynolds suggested another option of an Application Fee of $300 plus an abutter’s fee. Mr. Heney suggested an Application Fee of $150 and have the Applicant pay for the legal notice and certified mailings to abutters. Ms. Holmes suggested that the Applicant pay for the legal notice like the Planning Board and notifying the abutters. Mr. Heney suggested to also charging a fee for consulting (53G Account) for commercial applications and Ms. Reynolds suggested charging a base rate. Mr. Holland said that charging an Application Fee for a salaried employee who is being paid already doesn’t seem fair. Ms. Holmes said that the basis for the fee is the process that needs to be done to prepare the application but the Application Fee does go into the General Fund. The Board agreed to continue their discussion at the next meeting.

ADJOURNMENT
At 8:22pm, a Motion was made by Ms. Holmes to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Mr. Demers. Vote: Unanimous.

Respectfully submitted,

Maria D. Lajoie
Administrative Secretary
Maria Lajoie
Maria Lajoie
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 11:09 am
Location: Community Development Department

Return to 2013 Zoning Board of Appeals Meetings

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron