Members present: Dan Coolidge; Julia Rector; Jeff Newcomb; and Charlie McCrave, alternate
Also present for duration of appropriate items: Ed and Mary Hiller; Gerald Hersey; Jim Hersey; Pierre Bedard; Andy Degan, Ausbon Sargent Land Preservation Trust (ASLPT); John and Joyce Bourdon; John Guiheen.
Organization of Board
The Board vote unanimously in favor of Dan Coolidge as chair. The Board voted unanimously in favor of re-adopting the rules of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
Public Hearing: A request from Gerald Hersey for a variance to permit a lot with less than the required 250′ of road frontage on a Town road. The property is in the Rural/Agricultural District.
Coolidge advised the applicants that, as there was not a full board present, they had the option of continuing with those Board members present, or continuing to a specified future date. Should they opt to continue, the vote would have to be at least three in favor to pass, and the applicant is not eligible to appeal based on less than a full board being present. The applicants chose to continue with four voting members present.
The proposal and photos of different areas of the lot were presented to the Board and the public present. The proposal is for a new lot with 120’ of road frontage on a Town road.
The property is currently under an easement which allows for two acres to be withdrawn in order to construct a dwelling. The easement also requires a 100’ setback from Sucker Brook, and property owners are unable to restrict access to the property for timber management and passive recreation.
The following questions were asked by the Board members:
Why was this not a legal lot at the time of the easement? Zoning requirements at the time of any subdivision were not considered at the time the property was put under an easement.
Who agreed to the two-acre lot? As the Town of Andover is back-up to the easement, they agreed to it.
Is it possible to relocate the woods road in order to have more frontage? There are wetlands to the north.
Does Sucker Brook flood? No; however, the thinking at the time of the easement was in keeping the steep area near Sucker Brook out of the new lot and using the stone wall as the boundary.
How far does the log road go, and can it be changed? The road goes to the rear of the property, and it can change.
Do the Herseys own the complete lot? Yes.
Is a 100’ setback from the wetlands required? No.
Mr. Hiller stated that the required road frontage helps in density control; however, where there is 560’ of road frontage on the easement and there may never be more than this one home on the property, this should be considered. Mr. Hiller reiterated what Mr. Hill stated and feels there is an extreme hardship in requiring the 250’ of road frontage.
Mr. Bourdon stated he and his wife have no concerns with the proposal.
There being no further discussion, the public hearing was closed, and the discussion was brought back to the board.
Newcomb stated that he feels if the Zoning Board allows this, then more people would request the same, and he would like to visit the site prior to voting.
Coolidge and Rector also indicated they would like to visit the site. Coolidge stated he feels the spirit of the ordinance can be met due to the single-lot withdrawal and the 560′ of frontage with only one home allowed.
A site visit was scheduled for May 23 at 8:30 AM, and Coolidge will attend the Planning Board meeting on May 26 to discuss their thoughts on the proposal. The hearing was continued to May 27.