ZBA Minutes
July 14, 2009
Members Present: Steve Filipi, Chairman, Jane Roberts, Gretchen Wittenborg, Jack Ernst and Cathy Davis.
Others present: Alternate Sue Wood, Tom Parker, Selectmen’s representative, and abutters.
CTO: 7:00 PM
7:00 PM Public hearing: Case #09-03, Thomas and Deborah White application for a use variance to have two dwelling units on one lot, resulting from a proposed boundary line adjustment; property located on Ice House Point Road, Map 25, Lots 1 & 2, Rural District.
Tom White and Paul Grasewicz, surveyor, presented the plan for adjusting the western boundary line between Lots 1 & 2 to include a cabin owned by Mr. White, which is currently on Lot 1, owned by Robert White. Tom White recently purchased a cabin located on Lot 1, which has more than a dozen cabins on it. The cabins are owned by individuals who lease the land from Robert White. Robert White and Tom White have agreed to a boundary line adjustment that will have the effect of annexing Tom White’s new cabin to Lot 2 where his other cabin is located. The variance is sought because Fitzwilliam does not allow two dwelling units on one lot.
Grasewicz noted that with the lot line adjustment, Lot 1 becomes more conforming and lot 2 less conforming; however, it will give Mr. White enough room to put in a septic system and maneuver equipment on Lot 2. There is a septic system for each cabin now, but a shared system may be better in the future.
Filipi clarified that there are no restrictions on use of the cabins on Lot 1; they can be used seasonally or year round, unlike Woodbrook. Grasewicz said there is an understanding among cabin owners on Lot 1 that they can maintain their cabins on the leased land as long as they want. Mr. White said the land around the cabins is maintained as common land and each cabin owner takes care of their immediate property, checking with the property owner if necessary. Tom said his grandfather deeded the land under the cottage on Lot 2 to his father when his father bought the cottage. Grasewicz clarified that Mr. White will apply to the Planning Board for a boundary line adjustment, which is a technical subdivision regulated by the Fitzwilliam subdivision regulations. No new lots are created with a boundary
line adjustment.
Filipi asked if there were any comments from the abutters. Gary Deal said he and his Dad own the lot across the road from Mr. White and their well is within 20+ feet of the property to be annexed. He wondered if the cottage would stay on R. White land. Grasewicz said the cottage would be annexed to the T. White property when the parcel was conveyed.
Bruce Hill said he was immediately adjacent to the property. He said the property used to be a trashy place and Mr. White has cleaned it up and taken care of it. He feels this application should be approved since there has been such an improvement in the property.
Dorothy Hobson wondered it the property could be subdivided once the variance and lot line adjustment were granted. She has concerns about additional run-off into the lake if more cottages are built. Filipi said the two lots together are less than the minimum necessary to subdivide in the Rural District. He said it is best for the lake if there is a good septic system serving both cottages.
Hearing no further discussion, Ernst moved, Wittenborg seconded and the Board voted to close the public hearing. Filipi suggested discussing each criterion for granting a variance before voting. He asked the Board to consider that the variance, if granted, may increase the potential for additions to be made to the existing cottages by increasing the land available for setbacks with the lot line adjustment. He wondered if the Board should put conditions on it if the variance is granted. He feels he would like to put conditions on the amount of finished living space.
Roberts asked if there was a septic system for each cottage. There is. Filipi said that with more land, a larger system can be installed in the future that could serve both cottages.
Wittenborg clarified the addresses of both cottages. Ernst asked about setbacks on the northwest corner. Grasewicz said there was another cottage there and he didn’t think he could move the line back enough to create the legal 20 foot setback. Wittenborg said there will be room on the northeast and southeast sides for additions in the future if necessary.
Wittenborg made a motion to approve the variance application. Roberts seconded. The Board then deliberated on the variance criteria.
Section 127-42 E. Mandatory Findings for Use Variances:
(1) There would not be a diminution in value of surrounding properties as a result of granting this variance. Wittenborg said the plan provides the possibility for a better septic system and room to move equipment on the lot, which would improve the value of surrounding properties. Filipi said sometimes these buildings are left to go to ruin but if the land is owned too it is taken better care of. Davis and Ernst agreed with Wittenborg and Filipi. Davis added that this lot line adjustment will make it a more workable lot. Wittenborg said the public interest is better served as the building and services are improved. The Board unanimously agreed with this finding.
(2) The granting of this variance would not be contrary to the public interest. The Board unanimously agreed with this finding, citing the above reasons. Filipi added that public health might be improved too.
(3)(a) The zoning restriction as applied to the property interferes with the reasonable use of the property, considering the unique setting of the property within its environment. Wittenborg said it certainly is a unique setting. Filipi agreed, saying it pre-dates zoning and it doesn’t work to apply current zoning. The Board unanimously agreed with this finding.
(3)(b) There is not a fair and substantial relationship between the general purposes of the zoning ordinance and the specific restriction on the property. Wittenborg said this goes to the pre-zoning issue. Davis said you can’t insist on current zoning, adding that there will not be personal ownership to care for and improve the land and cottage. The Board unanimously agreed with this finding.
(3)(c) The variance would not injure the public or private rights of others. Ernst said he doesn’t see any change to the area other that the lot lines. Filipi said the well situation referred to by the abutter will be addressed at the time a new septic system is designed. Davis said this change won’t injure the rights of owners on lot 1. Filipi said this change does not increase the load on land or services. The Board unanimously agreed with this finding.
(4) By granting this variance substantial justice would be done. Filipi said the lot line adjustment gives Mr. White a more reasonable use of the parcel. The Board unanimously agreed with this finding.
(5) The use contemplated by the applicant as a result of obtaining this variance would not be contrary to the spirit of the ordinance. Ernst and Roberts said the use hasn’t changed substantially; just the lot line has changed. Filipi said he doesn’t see use as contrary to the spirit of the ordinance. The Board unanimously agreed with this finding.
Filipi announced that the variance is granted.
7:30 PM Public hearing: Case # 09-04, Fitzwilliam Green LLC application for an Area Variance to reduce frontage of one lot in a proposed two-lot subdivision from the required 300 feet to 275 feet; property located on Jaffrey Road, Map 15. Lot 52-3, Rural District.
Filipi read the case and Wittenborg recused herself. Sue Wood, alternate, was seated.
David Green and Matt Buonomano presented the application for an area variance, saying they own the 6 acre property and feel the existing farmhouse will sell more quickly if it is on a smaller parcel of land. They wish to subdivide it into two parcels but want to preserve what they feel is a natural boundary line at the point where a culvert crosses the road. This would make one lot 25 feet short of the 300 feet of frontage needed for a legal lot.
Using the culvert as the boundary will preserve the existing landscaping and vegetation east of the culvert. They showed a photo of the site, pointing out that if the boundary line is at 300 feet. It will come right up to the mail box, cutting into the garden. They feel it will be problematic when it comes to maintenance of the area. The lot with 275 feet of frontage has more than 120,000 square feet and is contiguous with an 11 acre parcel they own. The new lot will be a building lot, if the variance is granted.
Filipi asked Mr. Parker if he had any comments. Parker wondered if this variance is really necessary. He knows it is convenient for the owners but wondered if it was in the best interests of the town to adjust down a zoning requirement when someone needs it, without an outstanding need for it.
Mr. Green said they would not be gaining any more lots by doing this, adding that the Planning Board has indicated they can subdivide with eithr the variance of the 300 feet of frontage. The adjustment requested involves only 125 square feet of land. Mr. Buonomano said they tried to use the old historic stone walls as boundary lines when doing previous subdivisions and that has affected the frontage of the house lot. Filipi asked if the land was all wetlands on both sides of the street at the culvert. It is. He added that the only land really affected is the garden.
Roberts said she had a problem with 275 feet when there are no barriers to a 300 foot frontage. Mr. Buonomano said they were just trying to avoid the awkwardness around maintaining the landscaping. Filipi said he’d have a hard time approving the findings for a variance in this case, adding that if it was a big stone wall or something it would benefit the public to grant the variance. It is hard to prove the uniqueness of the situation to warrant a variance.
Roberts moved, Ernst seconded and the Board voted to close the public hearing.
Wittenborg asked if the applicant wanted to withdraw the application. Mr. Green and Mr. Buonomano conferred and decided to withdraw the application.
Roberts moved, Davis seconded and the Board accepted the withdrawal of the application.
Minutes: The Board reviewed the minutes of the June 30, 2009 meeting. Wittenborg moved, Ernst seconded and the Board approved the minutes as written.
Ernst moved, Roberts seconded and the Board vote to adjourn at 8:30 PM.
| 
