SEPTEMBER 10, 2009 Minutes

Pittsfield Zoning Board of Adjustment
Town Hall, 85 Main Street
Pittsfield, NH 03263
Minutes of Public Meeting

DATE: Thursday, SEPTEMBER 10, 2009

ITEM 1. Call to Order at 7:00 P.M. by Ed Vien, Chairman

ITEM 2. Roll Call

Members Present: Ed Vien (EV) Chairman, Carole Dodge (CD), Vice Chairman, Paul Metcalf, Sr. (PM), Jesse Pacheco (JP), Larry Federhen (LF), Ted Mitchell (TM), Alternate and Delores Fritz, Recording Secretary.

Members Absent:

None.

ITEM 3. Approval of Minutes of July 9, 2009

(LF) Motion to approve Minutes of July 9, 2009. (PM) Second.
Correction as to name of Alternate Ted Mitchell was noted. Carried 5-0.

ITEM 4. Public Hearing with respect to an application for an Area Variance filed by Walter Jensen, P.O. Box 2645, Concord, NH 03301 to construct (replace) a 10 ft. x 10 ft. deck on an existing non-conforming lot located at 23 Concord Hill Road, Pittsfield, NH 03263 (Tax Map U-06, Lot 17). The property is owned by Walter Jensen and is located in the SUBURBAN Zone.

My name is Charles Russell, Attorney for Walter Jensen and I will be representing him tonight since he is not available to be present. I have been to the house and seen the deck after it was constructed. (EV) noted that he had stopped by and seen the deck. Mr. Russell noted it is a small house and he was present at the walk through when Mr. Jensen was contemplating purchasing the house and at that time explained to those present what he was going to do. The deck ended up being larger than the prior one. It does not extend or jut out very far. The abutters were notified and I was told that some had filed letters and there was no objection. It is a tight spot and the deck makes it look better. There was no attempt to make it exceedingly larger than it was before. (Mr. Russell presented several pictures to the Board noting finished deck.)

(LF) So, the new deck has already been done. Mr. Russell: Yes, it has been done. When he walked area with Town officials, he was told that he did not need a permit but now because it is larger, needs a Variance.

(EV) read into the Minutes, letters from abutters William and Carol Elkins and Robert Drolet. He noted that he had spoken directly to Mr. Drolet and he has no problem with the deck. He also noted that there is a specific application for Area and Use Variance and that the one that was filed by Mr. Jensen is an old application. Since Mr. Jensen has filled out the old application and answered questions for both the Area and Use Variance, we will follow the questions pertaining to the Area Variance. I will now open it to the public.

PUBLIC INPUT:

Dan Schroth noted that this would be an easy one to be granted and should be granted. He noted that people on Concord Hill Road are working to improve that area.

CRITERIA:

A. No diminution in value of surrounding properties will be suffered.

(EV) It improves the look of the neighborhood.

All Agree 5-0.

B. Granting the Area Variance would not be contrary to the public interest.

(PM) It does not directly affect them, but they seem to be happy with it. (CD) It increases the value of the properties around it.

All Agree 5-0.

C. An Area Variance is needed to enable the applicant’s proposed use of the property given the special conditions of the property.

(EV) It is in a very tight area. The buildings are close together. If it was smaller, it would not be much of a deck.

(JP) This has already been done. We are giving a Variance for something that has already been done? Mr. Russell: “Yes.” So the old deck was pulled down and this one was built. Was a permit pulled for this? Mr. Russell: I was told he walked through with “officials” and I am not sure if this is covered by other work on the building. (JP) Are we giving a Variance for something that is already in place? Shouldn’t this be for the Building Inspector and not us? (CD) noted that the new deck was supposed to be the same as the old deck, but now it is larger. (JP) Isn’t this backtracking by giving a Variance for something that is already done? (LF) We are only saying that we are granting the Variance. (EV) This is true, but not an answer to (JP’s) question. (JP) Can you take a deck down without a permit? (CD) You can if you replace it with the same footprint. (PM) But, he changed it. (EV) Look at it and take it apart as to what the proposed use is. He needs this Variance. (JP) I am trying to see how we can do this. (EV) Your concern is people doing things and coming in after the fact if they get caught. (JP) Replacing it the way it is would be one thing, but then building it bigger is another. (PM) Mistakes are made honestly. (JP) I have seen the property and if I remember it correctly, it was a rickety old deck. (CD) It was just a back entrance before.

(JP) I would agree if he was going to build it, but he already has it. I do agree that it does do the building justice. I am just trying to see how to deal with this. (EV) He has been working with the Building Inspector on this. The Building Inspector sent us a note as to what happened. (JP) We should be voting on something that is an exception, not giving him a Variance do it.

All Agree 5-0.

(PM) A lot of people are not notified by Building Inspector to know exactly what to do. (JP) In Massachusetts, if a builder did it this way, the owners would have to take it down.

D. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some other method reasonably feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an Area Variance.

All Agree 5-0.

E. Granting the Area variance would permit substantial justice to be done.

(EV) He is not infringing on the neighbors. (CD) It improves the value of the property.

All Agree 5-0.

F. The proposed use is not contrary to the spirit of the Ordinance.

(EV) It is in the rear of the property and affects none of the abutters. (JP) “This is where I have a problem with it.”

All Agree 5-0.

Discussion: (EV) On the record, I would highly recommend Mr. Jensen become familiar with the Zoning Ordinances. Mr. Russell: I know he purchased this property and met with the Building Inspector. (EV) This may sound like a little thing, but with a big project it could be a problem. Mr. Russell: He needs to have better communication concerning what he needs to do. He walked through it with Town Building Inspector to get an idea. He has another house also and is working with the Building Inspector on that one. (JP) I understand he is fixing them up, but he needs to follow the rules and regulations

(CD) Motion to grant an Area variance for Walter Jensen, P.O. Box 2645, Concord, NH 03301 for a deck having been replaced to the size of
10 ft x 10 ft. on an existing non-conforming lot located at 23 Concord Hill Road, Pittsfield, NH 03263 (Tax Map U06, Lot 17.) The property is located in the SUBURBAN Zone. (PM) Second. Carried 5-0.

(EV) explained the appeal process to Mr. Russell and requested that he convey the Board’s concerns to Mr. Jensen. Mr. Russell agreed.

ITEM 5. Public Hearing with respect to an application for a Use Variance filed by Paul Provencal, 17 Crescent Street, Pittsfield, NH 03263 to operate an automotive service station at 790 Catamount Road, Pittsfield, NH 03263 (Tax Map R-19, Lot 6). The property is owned by Wayne Summerford,
790 Catamount Road, Pittsfield, NH 03263. This property is located in the RURAL Zone.

Mr. Summerford related that he thought that there had been some miscommunication and the wrong application was filed. (EV) The Board agrees. Application should be filed by property owner. Mr. Summerford indicated that he was hoping that the Board would hear it as a Special Exception instead of a Variance tonight. (EV) related that there was another issue concerning the application and that one of the abutters had not been notified. The correct map and lot are noted on the application but the incorrect owner is indicated. The correct abutter has not been notified by certified mail. Mr. Summerford noted that he did not know all of his neighbors. (EV) This is a big concern and since she is not present tonight, we cannot assume that she knows about this. Mr. Summerford also noted that it was not an automotive service station. Mr. Provencal noted that he was called by the Building Inspector to come down and fill out just the front of the application, which I did. He then called me again and notified me that there was a fee of $190 and that is how it evolved that we are here tonight.

(EV) suggested that this be re-noticed as a Special Exception and be scheduled for September 24th. He noted that it would be cleaner to do it all over again. (PM) What is the rush? Is there an opening date scheduled? Mr. Summerford explained that because Mr. Provencal has been laid off and that his business is slow, they had wanted to begin as soon as possible. (PM) Will you be selling gasoline there? Mr. Summerford noted they would not and agreed that he would provide the Board with some pictures. (EV) noted that even if approved, he would still have to go through the Building Inspector and would be responsible for whatever requirements in rules and regulations. Mr. Summerford explained that there would be no outside jobs.

After discussion, Mr. Wayne Summerford withdrew his application for a Use Variance without prejudice.

(LF) Motion to accept withdrawal of Use Variance application without prejudice as requested by Wayne Summerford and Paul Provencal.
(JP) Second. Carried 5-0.

ITEM 6. Members Concerns

(CD) Applicants are getting the wrong information and paperwork for no reason and it is down to one office. The Building Inspector is not conveying the information the way he should to the general public. There is no consistency.

(EV) I would like to sit down with the Building Inspector and discuss this with him. (JP) Can another member be there? I am concerned as to what happened this evening. We are voting on something that is an exception. (EV) We have the authority to take it away if we want to. (JP) The Building Inspector is supposed to issue the permit. (EV) To replace the deck or steps, you do not need a Building Permit. He was there and he noticed it after the fact. (JP) Looking at something that is already there, you cannot go through the criteria and make a valid decision. (EV) In some instances, builders are fined for work done without proper permits. We might have to look into that. Fines are imposed per day until compliance. (EV) noted that he would invite the Building Inspector to the next Zoning Board meeting.

(PM) questioned whether any information had been acquired regarding a clear water map? There are new regulations and as I read the regulations it gives the required footage. The new one is 250 ft. back. (EV) This is the Shoreline Protection Act and I think it relates to new businesses.

(JP) We had talked about having a map on the wall in here showing the different zones. (EV) to look into it.

ITEM 7. Public Input

Dan Schroth related that everyone knows that work is scarce and it is not getting any better. It is expected that it will not within the next two years. This winter is going to be tough and resources are limited. Regulations are putting this country out of business. If you are not going to grant them the right to do business, they will be going underground to do it secretly. We should not be turning anyone down.

(EV) noted that he is not insensitive to the problem. I am working 32 hours a week myself and it hurts badly. Your point is well taken.

Mr. Summerford related that Town could help make the process smoother. The word is out that Pittsfield is not a business friendly place. I would hope that this changes. (EV) noted that the Economic Development Committee has recently sent out a questionnaire to local businesses in the outlying areas of Town and would send him one. I would very much be interested in your comments.

Close Public Input

ITEM 8. Adjournment

(PM) Motion to adjourn. (LF) Second. Carried 5-0.

Meeting adjourned at 8:05 P.M.

Approved: September 24, 2009

_______________________________ ____________________
Ed Vien, Chairman Date
Zoning Board of Adjustment

I Tape

I hereby certify that these Minutes were recorded by me on September 10, 2009 and publicly posted on September 16.

______________________________________
Delores A. Fritz, Recording Secretary