Minutes posted at this web site have not been checked for consistency with the printed minutes that are available in the Wilton Town Offices. If you need the definitive minutes of a ZBA meeting, please obtain the printed minutes from the town offices.
September 8, 1999
|Voting Board||Chairperson Neil Faiman; members Steve Blanchard & Jim Tuttle; alternate member Joanna Eckstrom.|
|Agenda||Russell Kincaid - variance/special exception|
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Faiman at 7:42 p.m.
Case # 9/8/99-1 Kincaid
Russell Kincaid has applied for a variance to section 14.3.1 of the Ordinance, for the requirement that he have 6 dry acres per dwelling unit and a variance to section 14.3.3 of the Ordinance, for his septic system and residence to be 150-200 feet from intermittent streams or open water.
Chairman Faiman explained that tonight there is one application for a variance from Russell Kincaid. Mr. Faiman continued that after reviewing the application, it seems that it may be easier for Mr. Kincaid not to go through a variance request. The application is for a variance to allow for placement of a mobile home and a septic system on a lot that does not meet the area and setback requirements. Mr. Faiman apologized that he should have looked at this application earlier, however, it is possible to build single family homes provided you can get State approval. You do not need a variance, but you do need to submit for a special exception.
Steve Blanchard added that Mr. Kincaid does not have to prove hardship. Chairman Faiman continued that the Board should go ahead and handle this as a special exception tonight, for section 17.3 - the Zoning Board may grant a special exception and for section 17.2 - the lot may be used for a single family usage subject to all requirements.
Chairman Faiman explained that Mr. Kincaid has a lot which does not meet the requirement for setback and area. If the lot pre-dates the requirements, we would rather you use it for a single family home. Chairman Faiman explained that Mr. Kincaid does not have to meet the hardship portion of the setback.
Renville Clark, abutter on Stiles Road, requested clarification on the special exception. Regarding if we understand, section 17.2 allows the building of a residence on a non-conforming lot, because it waives the setback requirements, but not the area, correct? Chairman Faiman responded that is correct. We have a Board of only 4 members tonight, and we usually have 5 members, however, we need 3 votes to accept anything. Steve Blanchard commented that the applicant could also wait another month until there are 5 members present. Mr. Kincaid stated he would like to continue tonight. Chairman Faiman requested Mr. Kincaid to present what he is trying to accomplish and the Board will ask questions, then the public will have the opportunity to ask questions. After that the Zoning Board will have a discussion.
Russell Kincaid explained that the pond across the road from his lot should be, according to ordinance, 300' from his building, however, there is no portion of his lot that is buildable which is that far away. The pond is stagnant, as there is no inlet, therefore Mr. Kincaid questions whether it is really a significant pond. Jim Tuttle stated that is the fire pond. Russell Kincaid commented that it looks like a dug hole due to its steep walls. Mr. Kincaid feels that the ordinance refers to flowing water, not just a puddle. The purpose of the ordinance is to limit the number of septic systems in that zone, I think this one is not going to change that number per acre significantly. That is why Mr. Kincaid feels that the building should be allowed.
Jim Tuttle asked Mr. Kincaid if a perk test or septic plan have been done? Mr. Kincaid responded that he held those up until he came to this meeting. Mr. Kincaid continued that he did his own perk test and it was 4.5 inches per hour. Joanna Eckstrom asked when the lot was created? Mr. Kincaid responded that he does not know exactly, but it was there when they subdivided in 1976. Ms. Eckstrom stated two culverts are shown, are they existing? Mr. Kincaid - yes they are existing.
Chairman Faiman read a letter concerning a brook that runs through the culvert. Mr. Kincaid acknowledged that there is a brook running through. Chairman Faiman asked about Mr. Kincaid's setbacks from that brook? Mr. Kincaid responded it is about 100' from that brook. Chairman Faiman stated he thinks it needs to be 200' and asked if this is watershed district or aquifer? Steve Blanchard answered it is watershed. Chairman Faiman noted that the brook runs into Stoney Brook. Jim Tuttle explained that this flows into the reservoir. Chairman Faiman requested some clarification on exactly where this lot is. Jim Tuttle explained that the brook is on the lower end. Russell Kincaid explained that Sinclair's is right across the street from his lot. Jim Tuttle - so this is on the right side going down Burton Highway? Mr. Kincaid answered yes.
Mike Pascarella, abutter (lot 17), Deidre and Renville Clark abutters (lot 12) and Edson Skinner, abutter, were also present. Joanna Eckstrom asked if the seasonal brook forms the boundary? Chairman Faiman responded that it is close to the boundary but does not form it. Jim Tuttle - is that part of the overflow from the fire pond? Deidre Clark presented another map to the Board and explained where the fire pond is and some of the current owners of the abutting properties. Chairman Faiman - there is a 150' setback for intermittent streams. Is this a perennial or intermittent stream? This letter explains that the brook flows most of the year. The perennial setback is 100'. Mr. Faiman continued that this lot has been there for a good while and the fire pond across the road does not seem like a big deal. How close is the leech field to the brook and is it perennial or intermittent? Russell Kincaid answered that it is dry right now. Jim Tuttle commented that Mr. Kincaid has more than what the State require for setback. The State requirement is only 75' for standing water. Is this a two-bedroom home? Mr. Kincaid answered that it will be a 3-bedroom system. Chairman Faiman - would it be possible to slide the home down a little to get it 200' from the stream? Mr. Kincaid answered it would be possible.
Chairman Faiman asked if anyone would like to add to the discussion? Renville Clark, abutter, asked about the affect on property values in the area. Can Mr. Kincaid tell us what the value of this mobile home will be when it is complete and how it relates to the other homes in the neighborhood. Mr. Kincaid stated he would put it on the market at $65,000. Renville Clark also stated that he believes the lot was created as early as 1976 and it pre-dates the creation of the watershed and the ordinance. Mr. Clark continued to make two points - first that he does not know if Mr. Kincaid is aware that the minimum lot size required to support a septic system and second whether there is a good potential for a septic system. The minimum lot size is one acre and if it has good potential for septic, the minimum lot size is 5 acres. The map submitted with the application shows the lot at 1.5 acres. I calculated and came up with 1.41 acres. Also, the 6.2.1 ordinance regarding the acreage depending on soil types and I do not know what the soil type is or whether it is really 1.5 acres. The 14.3.3 ordinance does command a 200' setback for perennial streams and 150' for intermittent streams or any wetland. I did not have an opportunity to see the wetlands or a float control system. According to the ordinance, we need to be at least 150' from a stream.
Chairman Faiman stated that is a good question regarding 17.3 and 14.3.3 for soil type and setbacks. Steve Blanchard - when the ordinance was written, there was no watershed. Chairman Faiman - my feeling is that we may be able to give the special exception for the size. But on the setback from the water, we need to be sure. Joanna Eckstrom - what is the procedure to grant septic approval? Jim Tuttle explained that you have to dig a hole 8 feet deep, then a 2-3 foot hole beside it. You then test the absorption rate - how long it takes the water to go in the ground and there is data, which gauges and identifies the type of soil it is. The bottom of the leech field has to be a certain depth and with a formula they figure out what the soil can handle (how many bedrooms it can take). Joanna Eckstrom asked if there is no State septic approval, he can't do anything? Jim Tuttle stated that is correct, he requires State approval. Joanna Eckstrom - depending on where they find the best perk test results, they can determine where the best place to put the septic will be? Jim Tuttle - you find the best place for the leech field, then you place the house a certain footage from that, and the well needs to be a certain footage from there. Joanna Eckstrom - so Mr. Kincaid's drawing of the house and leech field, etc., is where Mr. Kincaid would prefer it to be? Mr. Kincaid responded yes. Joanna Eckstrom - do you have a copy of the deed that describes the boundaries of your property? Mr. Kincaid pulled out the deed and presented it to the Board. Joanna Eckstrom read the deed aloud. The deed stated the property is 1.5 acres, more or less.
Chairman Faiman noted that the deed is dated 1989 and asked if Mr. Kincaid bought the property from Sanders? Mr. Kincaid replied that he had. Chairman Faiman - the basic situation of the ordinance is to provide for this. I want to see everything set back from the brook - I would not worry about the fire pond. The area requirement waived in accordance with 17.2 and the setbacks from the fire pond but not from the steam on the property. Mr. Faiman continued that there was no evidence presented concerning wetlands on the property and our decision has not been made on that at this time. Joanna Eckstrom - is that something that would be discovered by the State? Jim Tuttle answered yes. Renville Clark - on the plan, there is a sweep and I am not sure if that is water or not? Mr. Kincaid answered that is the outflow of the pond. Steve Blanchard - that is another area where the septic design has to be shown. The concern would be that we would like to see 200' if possible. The brook and overflow needs to be shown on the plan - the State is very strict about that. Jim Tuttle - they may have to put a pipe for water in to be able to get the setback requirement. Steve Blanchard - the State is starting to put a concrete retaining wall around the leech field. What if the State says to put it closer to the brook because their requirements are not strict? Chairman Faiman - if their decision conflicts with ours, then Mr. Kincaid would have to come back to us.
Jim Tuttle - can we add the 150' minimum on the plan? If they design the septic and it is 10' closer, it will still be above the 150' minimum. Chairman Faiman - I'd like it 200' from the brook. Mr. Faiman stated that he is proposing that we be strict on the brook side and let the State worry about the overflow ditch on the other side of the road.
|Motion||Steve Blanchard moved to do the following: The Board recognizes that the lot area requirement be waived by 17.2a subject to approval by NH water supply and pollution control decision; that the ZBA grant a special exception to 17.3 waiving the setback from the pond across from the property and the overflow from that pond; that we require 200' setback from the brook at the east end of the property and that we have seen no evidence pertaining to wetland soils on the property and therefore make no determination on the wetland soils on the property. Joanna Eckstrom seconded. All were in favor.|
Chairman Faiman noted that a written notice of the ZBA decision will be sent and that any person affected by the decision may request another meeting in writing within 20 days and file in the town offices. In the absence of such a request, the decision will be final. There was no further discussion.
There were no changes.
|Motion||Ms. Eckstrom moved to approve the minutes, Steve Blanchard seconded. All were in favor.|
Mr. Blanchard stated that because of his work situation, he would like to resign as a board member and become an alternate member.
A motion was made and seconded to adjourn the meeting. All were in favor and the meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m.Respectfully submitted
Darlene Bouffard, Clerk