ANTRIM ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

August 26, 2003 meeting

Members Present:

Tom CochranRon HaggettJohn Kendall Ben Pratt Tim Quachenbush

Member Absent:

Carol CourtDon WinchesterPaul Young

Public attendees:

David BoothKathleen McCalasky

Steven Buckley, Atty.

Chairman Pratt opened the meeting at 7:00 PM. Although a quorum was present, Mr. Buckley preferred to present his arguments to a full complement of the Board. The Secretary contacted members that were not present at that time which resulted in five members being present which allowed Mr. Pratt to convene the public hearing at 7:25 PM. He appointed Mr. Haggett to sit for Ms. Court and Mr. Cochran to sit for Mr. Winchester.

The hearing was a continuation of the public hearing scheduled for August 12, 2003 on the request by David L. Booth and Kathleen T. McCalasky, a.k.a Long Trail Acres Farm to appeal the decision of the Building Inspector made on May 27, 2003 issuing a cease and desist order for operating a commercial activity without applying for a site plan review for property located at 22 Mattheson Road Tax Map 4, Lot 2 located in the Rural District.

Mr. Pratt asked the applicant to present his appeal. Mr. Buckley who represented Mr. Booth presented the Board with documentation that included the original cease and desist notice issued by Mr. Parsons, the Building Inspector, photographs of the Crop Shop, copies of RSA’s 674:32-a, 674:32-b, 674:32-c and a business plan for Long Trail Acres dated May 28, 2003. He described Long Trail Acres as a community supported cooperative consisting of forty-six shareholders who had paid $500.00 for their share. He stated that in addition to produce raised on the premises the members could also obtain items such as eggs, bread, salad dressings, cookies, meats, dairy and food products. He emphasized that sales of all items were restricted to shareholders. The thrust of Mr. Buckley’s argument was that the current State legislative philosophy regarding the governing of agricultural activities was leaning towards more leniency regarding the imposition of restrictions. He pointed out, that in his opinion, the above referenced RSA’s reflected that philosophy. Mr. Buckley asserted that strict application of Article XVIII; Section D of the Antrim Zoning Ordinance has the effect of unreasonably affecting an agricultural use contrary to the provisions of the above referenced RSA’s. Complete documentation of the appeal is located in Zoning Board of Adjustment file #2003-08. Mr. Buckley respectfully requested that the Board consider his interpretation of the statutes and waive the necessity of Mr. Booth having to appear before the Planning Board for a minor site plan review.

Mr. Haggett felt that his reading of RSA 674:32-c did not mean any unreasonable restriction of agricultural use would result by the application of a minor site plan review. The Secretary reviewed Section VI, paragraph A of the Antrim Subdivision & Site Plan Review Regulations that outlined submission requirements for a change of use. Mt. Pratt explained the purposes of a site plan review was to issue notification to neighbors, conformance with other zoning ordinances and building requirements, clarification of hours of operation, matters of safety, etc. In his opinion such a review would be beneficial to the applicant to insure harmony with abutters and compliance with existing regulations. Mr. Pratt pointed out that agricultural activities were a permitted use in the applicant’s district and he did not feel that such a review would unreasonably affect such usage. The Secretary pointed out that the site plan approval reference in Article XVIII, Section D, dealt with the applicability of such a review as regards obtaining building permits for non-residential developments and not non-residential use of property as argued by Mr. Buckley. The Secretary asked Mr. Buckley if the essence of his argument was that anyone who wished to start an agricultural operation should be exempt from site plan review. Mr. Buckley said he was not arguing a hypothetical case, only that of Long Trail Acres. He did suggest that the Board limit the operation to the existing 46 members and require a reappearance if the number of members increases. Mr. Quachenbush felt that an initial review made more sense than repeated reappearance’s. Mr. Cochran said he failed to see the unreasonableness of requesting a site plan review and in his opinion there were substantial benefits to be had, not only by the applicant but also to the abutters.

A concern expressed by a number of the Board members was that they did not have the authority to waive the requirement for a site plan review for a change of use based on the possibility that unreasonable restrictions would be applied. Such a waiver could lead to the arbitrary application of the requirement. Following some additional discussion, a motion was made by Mr. Haggett to deny the appeal of Mr. Booth from an administrative decision made by the Building Inspector in a letter dated May 27, 2003. Mr. Pratt seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Mr. Cochran – aye, Mr. Haggett – aye, Mr. Kendall – abstain, Mr. Pratt – aye, Mr. Quachenbush – aye. The motion was carried.

Mr. Buckley asked if the cease & desist order would be enforced. He was advised that as long as Mr. Booth continued to work in good faith with the Building Inspector to obtain the necessary building and sign permits and he initiated an application for site plan review, there would be no enforcement of the cease and desist order. Should Mr. Booth not proceed with that course of action, the matter would be referred to the Board of Selectmen who have the authority to enforce zoning ordinances and regulations.

Mr. Bryer appeared with Mr. McKenney, his surveyor for a conceptual consultation regarding the subdivision of property. Mr. Pratt stated for the record that nothing said by members of the Board, Mr. Bryer or Mr. McKenney would be binding. Mr. Bryer asked if the Board would favorably consider a waiver to Article XI, paragraph F.1 that requires 68,000 square feet for a building site, as he is only able to provide 61,000 square feet because of the wetlands on the property. After some discussion, it was agreed that Mr. McKenny would obtain information from the High Intensity Soil Survey and the Model Subdivision Regulations for Soil Based Lot Sizes, Rockingham County Conservation District dated June 1991. In the meantime the Secretary will research the origins of the Wetlands District overlay and the reasons for its adoption. The Board will review the information obtained and advise Mr. Bryer if they could in fact act favorably should he apply for a variance.

Mr. Haggett moved to accept the minutes of the August 12, 2003 meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Pratt & passed. The Secretary advised the Board that Town Council had advised that there is no appeal to the ZBA for a subdivision requirement. Town Counsel is to send a letter to the Secretary confirming that fact. Correspondence for the Municipal Law Lecture Series, a Budget & Finance Workshop and the 16th Annual Municipal Volunteer Awards was reviewed. A motion to adjourn was made by Mr. Haggett, seconded by Mr. Quachenbush and passed. Mr. Pratt adjourned the meeting at 9:25 PM

Respectfully submitted,

Paul L. Vasques, Secretary

Antrim Zoning Board of Adjustment

1