Skip navigation.

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 18, 2001

Voting Board Chairperson Neil Faiman; members Carol Roberts, Bob Spear & Jim Tuttle; alternate members Joanna Eckstrom and Ron Hanisch.
Clerk Diane Nilsson
Agenda
  • Lee & Diane Hambrick - special exception or variance
  • Jonathan Sargent & David Glines - variance
  • David Blackmer - variance

Mr. Faiman called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. and explained to the audience that the process for hearing an application is 1) to ask the applicant to explain what it is that he or she wants to do 2) why he needs permission from the zoning board to do it and 3)why he thinks the zoning board should give that permission. Once the board has a description from the applicant, members of the zoning board will be able to ask questions and get additional information that they may feel is missing in order to clarify what is being proposed. Once the zoning board is satisfied that they know what is going on, then any members of the public or abutters who may be present will have the opportunity to ask questions, provide additional information or offer opinions. Once all the information is in, the zoning board will then consider the case and, under normal circumstances, reach a decision the same evening.

Case # 8/8/01-3 LEE AND DIANE HAMBRICK (continued from August 8)

Lee and Diane Hambrick have applied for a special exception under the terms of section 17.3 of the Wilton Zoning Ordinance, or alternatively for a variance to the terms of section 6.2.4 of the Ordinance, to permit the construction of a 28X28 foot garage and apartment, attached by a 14X16 foot sunroom to the existing house on Lot D-158-9, 24 Rebeckah’s Way, where the garage would be closer to a lot line than otherwise permitted by the Ordinance. The Hambricks were not present so Mr. Faiman asked for the Sargent case to be presented. Ms. Eckstrom was not yet present so did not sit on this case.

Case #9/12/01-1 JONATHAN SARGENT, applicant (dba Jon’s Cycle Barn) & DAVID GLINES, owner.

Jonathan Sargent, applicant (doing business as Jon's Cycle Barn, Inc.), and David Glines, owner, have applied for a variance to section 16.1(h)4 of the Wilton Zoning Ordinance, to permit the placement of an internally illuminated sign on Lot F-145, 454 Isaac Frye Highway. Mr. Sargent explained that he has been in negotiations with Kawasaki for more than a year in order to become a Kawasaki dealer. One of Kawasaki’s requirements is that he purchase and install internally illuminated Kawasaki signs. He said that the signs would only be lit when he is open which is until 7 p.m. on Thursday night and 6 p.m. all other nights. He said that the installation would consist of two posts 3’ apart which would support two 2’ X 3’ signs topped with a 4’ X 6’ sign. The total height would be 18’. He provided photographs of his property and drawings of the signs. (See case file)

Mr. Faiman read the general requirements of section 16 (signs) and noted that the size cannot exceed 100 square feet and the top of the sign cannot exceed 16’ above ground level.

Mr. Sargent said that his signs total 36 square feet and he will make the height adjustment to 16’. Mr. Sargent explained that he didn’t know about the ordinance banning internally illuminated signs when he ordered the signs a month ago. Mr. Glines stated that when Mr. Sargent began negotiations with Kawasaki, the new sign ordinance had not yet been voted in.

Motion Mr. Hanisch moved to grant the variance for the internally illuminated signs as shown in the illustration subject to the condition that it will be no higher than 16 feet above the level of Isaac Frye Highway, and that it may be illuminated only when the business is open, and no later than 8 p.m. The motion was seconded by Mr. Spear. All voted in favor.

Mr. Faiman stated that the requested variance has been granted and Mr. Sargent will receive written notification in the mail. He further stated that the selectmen, any party to the action or proceedings, or any person affected thereby may apply for a rehearing of this decision. A request for a rehearing must be filed in writing with the Zoning Board of Adjustment on or before Thursday, October 18, 2001, and must fully specify all grounds on which the rehearing is requested. (N.H. RSA 677:2) This variance will expire on September 18, 2003 if the sign has not been erected by that date. (Wilton Zoning Ordinance section 17.4)

REASONS FOR DECISION:

  1. The proposed use will not diminish the values of the surrounding properties because the sign will only be seen from Commercial or Industrial zones.
  2. Granting the variance will be in the public interest because customers will be able to locate the shop more easily in the winter when it gets dark early.
  3. Denial of the variance would result in unnecessary hardship because Mr. Sargent is required by Kawasaki Motor Corp. USA to have an internally lighted sign in order to be a Kawasaki dealer.
  4. Granting the variance would do substantial justice because Mr. Sargent could keep his Kawasaki franchise.
  5. The proposed use is consistent with the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because in a retail business it is important that customers find your business, even after dark.

Case # 9/12/01-2 DAVID BLACKMER

David E. Blackmer has applied for a variance to section 6.2.3 of the Wilton Zoning Ordinance, to permit the subdivision of Lot C-7, 242 Old County Farm Road, into two lots, one or both of which would not have 200 feet of frontage on a public right of way, Class V or better.

Mr. Faiman recused himself from the board and Mr. Tuttle took his place as chairman. Ms. Eckstrom joined the board for this case. Patrick McHugh, of Divine, Millimet & Branch, represented Mr. Blackmer and explained that there are currently two homes on Mr. Blackmer’s 67 acre parcel (C-7). He would like to subdivide the parcel creating two lots; C-7-2 would be 55 acres and C-7-1 could be 12 acres. Neither lot has frontage on a public right of way Class V or better as they both front Old County Farm Road which is a Class VI road. The Class V road ends 20’ before the driveway of the proposed Lot C-7-1.

Mr. Glines stated that Mr. Blackmer purchased the property in 1974 with full knowledge that he had no frontage on a Class V or better road, so he doesn’t see a hardship in this case.

Mr. Tuttle explained that if Mr. Blackmer were to improve 200’ of Old County Farm Road then a variance would not be needed. The board discussed the various issues such as the lack of hardship and the fact that there are two non-conforming housing units on the property. The board asked Mr. Blackmer when the houses were constructed and he didn’t know for sure. The majority of the board wanted more information before making a decision.

Motion Ms. Eckstrom moved to continue the case to the October meeting with a request that Mr. Blackmer provide documentation as to when the various buildings were erected on his property. The motion was seconded by Mr. Spear. Four members voted in favor and Mr. Hanisch voted against.

Case # 8/8/01-3 LEE AND DIANE HAMBRICK (continued from August 8)

Motion Mr. Spear made a motion to deem the application of Lee and Diane Hambrick abandoned. It was seconded by Mr. Hanisch and four were in favor with Ms. Eckstrom abstaining.

At this point Mr. Faiman rejoined the board.

OTHER BUSINESS

Minutes - July 17, 2001

Motion Mr. Tuttle moved to accept the 7/7/01 minutes as written. Mr. Spear seconded and five were in favor with Ms. Roberts abstaining.

Minutes - August 8, 2001

Motion Mr. Tuttle moved to accept the 7/7/01 minutes as written. Mr. Spear seconded and five were in favor with Ms. Roberts abstaining.

The board discussed the increased cost of sending abutter notices ($2.44 each) and will consider raising the cost from $3 and $4 to something higher at the next meeting.

The board also decided to meet on the second Tuesday next month (October 9). They will then decide whether to make this a permanent change.

A motion was made to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Diane Nilsson, Clerk