Decision notices posted at this web site have not been checked for consistency with the printed decision notices that are available in the Wilton Town Offices. If you need the definitive text of a decision, please obtain the printed notice from the town offices.
Case 7/16/02–2
In response to Corinne Blagbrough’s appeal of the Wilton Planning Board’s approval of the A&T Forest Products two lot subdivision of Lot A–21, Burton Highway, in the Watershed District:
- With regard to point 1b of Mrs. Blagbrough’s letter of July 16, that the resulting Lot A–21–1 does not have 300 feet of frontage on a Class V or better public road, the Zoning Board found that the parcel of Town-owned land between Lot A–21–1 and Burton Highway is in fact part of the Burton Highway right of way, and that the Planning Board therefore did not make an error in counting the boundary with that parcel as part of the frontage of Lot A–21–1.
- With regard to point 1g of Mrs. Blagbrough’s letter of July 16, that a proper permit was not on file when roads were built on Lot A–21 prior to subdivision approval, the Zoning Board found that the roads constructed prior to subdivision approval were constructed and used as logging roads for a properly permitted logging operation, and that therefore all required permits were on file.
- With regard to point 3 of Mrs. Blagbrough’s letter of July 16, that the driveway and culverts on Lot A–21–1 are structures as defined by Section 3.1.31 of the Wilton Zoning Ordinance, and therefore may not be located less than 150 feet from wetlands or 200 feet from open water, per section 14.3.3 of the Ordinance, the Zoning Board has deferred a decision until its next meeting.
- All other points in Mrs. Blagbrough’s letters either were not argued at the Zoning Board hearing, or the Zoning Board declined to consider them, since they did not pertain to the interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance, which is the only area in which the Zoning Board has authority to review decisions of the Planning Board (RSA 676:5, III and RSA 677:15).
The hearing is continued to the Zoning Board’s August 13 meeting for a decision on whether driveways and culverts are structures for the purposes of Section 14.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance.
On August 12, 2002, Mrs. Corinne Blagbrough has requested that the Wilton Zoning Board reconsider its decision that the Wilton Planning Board was not in error in determining that Lot A–21–1, Burton Highway, has adequate frontage on a Class V or better road.
On August 13, the Zoning Board voted to deny the request for reconsideration, on the grounds that there was no error in its original determination.
This decision may be appealed to the Superior Court no later than Thursday, September 12, 2002. (N.H. RSA 677:4)
In response to Corinne Blagbrough’s appeal of the Wilton Planning Board’s approval of the A&T Forest Products two lot subdivision of Lot A–21, Burton Highway, in the Watershed District: with regard to point 3 of Mrs. Blagbrough’s letter of July 16, that the culverts on Lot A–21–1 are structures as defined by Section 3.1.31 of the Wilton Zoning Ordinance, and therefore may not be located less than 150 feet from wetlands or 200 feet from open water, per section 14.3.3 of the Ordinance, the Zoning Board found has found that according to the spirit and intent of the Wilton Zoning Ordinance, neither a driveway nor a culvert is considered a structure; therefore, that the driveway and culvert located on Lot A–21–1 cannot be considered to be a structure that encroaches in a wetland or open water setback, and the Planning Board was not in error on that point when it granted the subdivision.
On August 15, 2002, Mrs. Corinne Blagbrough requested that the Wilton Zoning Board reconsider its decision that the Wilton Planning Board was not in error in determining that the subdivision creating Lot A–21–1, Burton Highway, was permissible despite the presence of a culvert in the driveway located within the 150 foot (Sec. 14.3.3) setback in the Watershed District.
On August 23, the Zoning Board voted to deny the request for reconsideration, on the grounds that there was no error in its original determination.
This decision may be appealed to the Superior Court no later than Sunday, September 22, 2002. (N.H. RSA 677:4)