| Board Members | Chairman Neil Faiman; members, Carol Roberts, Bill Carnduff, Andy Hoar, and Joanna Eckstrom. |
|---|---|
| Agenda |
|
A MOTION was made by Ms. Roberts and SECONDED by Ms. Eckstrom to accept the minutes of March 13, 2014 with the following amendments:
- Change "Mr. Brooks" to "Mr. Brookes" throughout
- Line 176: Change "Ms. Conlon" to "Ms. Lorden"
Voting: 4 ayes; motion carried with Mr. Spear abstaining.
Mr. Faiman explained that T. Arthur Babineau 1997 Trust (Marie L. Sirois and Patricia Babineau, Trustees) has requested an extension of a special exception granted in ZBA Case #6/08/10-3, as authorized by section 17.4 of the Wilton Zoning Ordinance. The special exception, under section 11.4(a) of the Ordinance, permits the construction of an access drive off of Holt Road that would cross a wetland area in order to access lots D-20, D-21, D-22, D-70, D-71, and B-83. It was approved was approved on August 10, 2010, and will expire on August 10, 2014.
Wil Sullivan appeared before the Board, for the applicant, and explained that the Zoning Board granted the applicant a Special Exception in 2010 and extended it 2012. He explained that the RSA allows the Zoning Board to extend the Special Exception for good cause as long as it is not against the spirit of the ordinance. He further explained that the economy has not picked up enough to in order to sell house lots, which is beyond the applicant's control, and that the Zoning Ordinance and state statutes pertaining to this application have not change since the original approval was given.
In response to a question from Ms. Roberts, Mr. Sullivan stated that no activity including timbering is occurring at the present time.
In response to a question from Ms. Eckstrom, Mr. Sullivan stated that the geographic area has not changed in a way that would make the applicant change the location of the wetland crossing.
In response to a question from Mr. Carnduff, Mr. Faiman stated that the ordinance has not changed which regulates the number of extensions allowed.
In response to a question from Ingrid Howard, representing her daughter who is an abutter, Mr. Faiman explained that there is a stream that runs through the property and ends up in Stoney Brook and the applicant previously received approval to put in a large culvert to allow the stream to pass through while a road runs over the culvert.
In response to a question from Paul Loverme, of Holt Road, Mr. Sullivan stated that there have been no changes to the property since the original request.
In response to a question from Janelle Loverme, of Holt Road, Mr. Faiman explained that the abutters have the right to comment on the request but noted that this request is not an original wetland crossing application but rather a request is to extend the right to take advantage of what the Board has already approved, for another two years.
In response to a question from Ms. Loverme, Mr. Hoar explained that the wetland regulations have become a lot more restrictive since this crossing was approved.
Mr. Loverme read a letter of objection to the Board.
In response to a question from Mr. Loverme, Mr. Sullivan stated that the applicant has purchased Lots 137 and 139 on Burns Hill Road but noted that the applicant still needs this already approved Special Exception for a wetland crossing. Mr. Faiman noted that this information might be an argument for the fact that the circumstances have changed.
Mr. Sullivan noted that the Planning Board generally likes to see more than one means of egress on a plan so both points of access might be very important at some point. He further noted that even if access was taken over the new lots, the applicant wouldn't necessarily want to abandon the Special Exception.
Jane Hurlihy, of Holt Road, stated that Holt Road will need a lot of improvements in order to support a subdivision.
Tom Hurlihy, of 67 Holt Road, stated that the Board should be aware that Holt Road is a 25 foot road.
Ms. Eckstrom noted that the Zoning Board approved the wetland crossing to get to certain lots they did not approve a certain number of house lots.
Ben Maggey, 25 Holt Rd, stated that he thinks the extension should not be granted because a re-application would allow new residents to object.
A MOTION was made by Ms. Roberts and SECONDED by Ms. Eckstrom to close the public hearing.
Voting: 5 ayes; motion carried unanimously.
In response to a comment from Mr. Spear, Mr. Faiman reminded the Board to be careful to examine whether the requirements for granting a two year extension have been met and proceeded to read the pertinent RSA.
Discussion ensued.
A MOTION was made by Ms. Eckstrom and SECONDED by Mr. Spear to grant the requested extension.
Voting: 5 ayes; motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Faiman explained that the Thomas M. Conrad Revocable Trust has applied for a variance to section 6.1 of the Wilton Zoning Ordinance, to allow a self-storage complex on Lot B-122, 15 Burton Highway (at the corner of Burton Highway and Forest Road), which would not otherwise be permitted in the General Residence and Agricultural District. (Case #6/10/14-2)
Jeff Rider, engineer, and Tom Conrad, applicant appeared before the Board.
Mr. Conrad explained that his family had been in Wilton for a 100 years and noted that they own 47 Burton Highway which is the 17 acre abutting property and he is interested in putting self storage units on the property. He further stated that the proposal is not contrary to public interest and the use would provide a convenient storage option for area residences. He explained that his father in law owned Milford Mini Storage and there are at least 50 residents from Wilton who go Milford for the storage.
Mr. Conrad also stated that the proposal is consistent with the spirit of the ordinance as there are other industrial properties in the area and the lot is on busy Route 31 abutting the industrial zone. He stated that there is currently a dilapidated house and barn on the property and he would like to build a retirement residence on the abutting property.
Mr. Conrad stated that the proposal will not diminish the property values as it would be screened from most abutters, the abutter in the north is him, and there are also industrial abutters. He stated that access will come from Forest Road not Burton Highway.
Mr. Conrad stated the proposal would be allowed in the industrial district but won't generate any industrial nuisance. He further stated that the location does not allow the property to continue as a residence due to the traffic and noise.
Jeff Rider stated that property is abutting the industrial zone on two sides and there is a 30? drop in elevation from one side of the property to the other and it creates a hardship for putting in a septic system, etc. He stated that access will come from Forest Rd and the units will be cut into the hill. He further noted that the abutters on Burton Highway will be looking over the hill and he will be leaving some of the natural vegetation as a buffer.
In response to a question from Mr. Levesque, Mr. Rider stated that they will close off the Burton Highway access.
In response to questions from Ms. Eckstrom and Mr. Spear, Mr. Conrad stated that the location is not a desirable house lot because of the traffic on both sides and noted that the house has sat vacant for awhile. He further noted that the atmosphere is far different than it was in the 70's when the house was updated.
In response to a question from Mr. Levesque, Mr. Conrad stated that the facility in Milford has 300 units and gets about15 to 20 cars a day and less in the winter.
In response to a question from Mr. Levesque, Mr. Rider explained that he has not gotten DOT approval or had any surveying done as they decide to come to the Zoning Board first.
In response to a question from Ms. Eckstrom, Mr. Rider stated that they will be able to get a fire truck into the site.
In response to a question from Stan Young, Mr. Rider explained that the area will not be completely paved, there will be two containment areas, but they have not done any further engineering.
In response to a question from Gabe Bolland, Mr. Rider stated that the building will be about 52? from the edge of the wetland and the edge of pavement will be about 20? from the wetland.
In response to a question from Mr. Levesque, Mr. Rider stated that no outdoor storage, paint cans, hazardous materials would be allowed.
In response to a question from Mr. Hoar, Mr. Rider stated that the access does not cross a wetland.
Stan Young noted that the area across the street is a swamp and not developable as industrial.
Mr. Bolland, noted that he is representing Robert Boram of 317 Forest Road, explained that in 2012 Mr. Boram received a variance to turn the property from industrial to residential and he is concerned that if something hazardous spills on the lot under discussion that it will go right into the brook and onto Mr. Boram's property.
Mr. Rider explained that per the current regulations they will need to manage the storm water and all runoff will need to go through the drainage system and a storm water treatment facility.
Mr. Boram stated that there is property already zoned for this use already and he does not see how a variance is beneficial to the town.
Mr. Conrad stated that storage is at a shortage because of the economy.
Ms. Roberts thinks the proposal is too much for the property.
Mr. Spear stated that he thinks that the proposal is not consistent with the ordinance.
A MOTION was made by Mr. Hoar and SECONDED by Ms. Roberts to close the public hearing.
Voting: 5 ayes; motion carried unanimously.
Ms. Eckstrom stated that the density bothers her but it is a quiet industrial use.
Mr. Faiman stated that even a smaller proposal would not meet his approval as he sees the residential zoning cap on the end of Burton Highway and he thinks that it would create a dramatic change to the character of the neighborhood. He also noted that he does not see a hardship and he doesn't think that it is consistent with the spirit of the ordinance.
Mr. Spear stated that visually the location it is not industrially developed.
The applicant requested a withdrawal without prejudice.
A MOTION was made by Ms. Eckstrom and SECONDED by Mr. Spear to accept the withdrawal.
Voting: 2 ayes; motion failed with Ms. Eckstrom and Mr. Spear in favor and Mr. Faiman, Ms. Roberts, and Mr. Hoar against.
Hoar motion to deny on the grounds that it does not meet the criteria of hardship, spirit of the ordinance, reduce the propoty values, does not do substantial justice, /carol
Spear - yes, carol - no, andy - no, Faiman - no, and Joanna - yes
Adjournment
A MOTION was made by Mr. Spear and SECONDED by Ms. Eckstrom to adjourn the meeting.
Voting: 5 ayes; motion carried unanimously.
Chairman Faiman declared the meeting to be adjourned.
Respectfully Submitted,
Heather Loewy Nichols
Clerk
6/10/14 Page 3 of 3
Wilton ZBA
Revision 1