![]() |
![]() |
|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Register | FAQ | Donate | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2021
Posts: 3,391
Thanks: 3
Thanked 598 Times in 494 Posts
|
![]()
It isn't on the lake.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 579
Thanks: 125
Thanked 247 Times in 133 Posts
|
![]()
It’s not directly on the lake, but it is in the Winnipesaukee watershed, which is extremely important to protect and preserve.
https://winnipesaukeegateway.org/the.../introduction/ |
![]() |
![]() |
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Little Bear For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2021
Posts: 3,391
Thanks: 3
Thanked 598 Times in 494 Posts
|
![]()
There are many more properties closer to the lake than this one, that when they were being developed had a cumulative impact much large than this one would be.
We have problems getting the support of people - even those opposed to this project - when it is directly on the lake; and directly affects public property even without restricting private property The question on this property's development is more about the zoning rather than the environmental impact. It will be developed... probably just not with a Special Exception for a Commercial Event Facility. The Legislature passed some housing bills this year... but next session will see a whole slue of bills that went to study being remitted for another go around. So she will build something up there. What? I have no real idea. I guess as the laws change her plans may change. It could make a decent farm... which is a business with special tax advantages... and not have to go through all this. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 579
Thanks: 125
Thanked 247 Times in 133 Posts
|
![]()
Please try to attend the Alton Zoning Board meeting on Thursday night June 6 at 6:00pm at the Alton Town Hall. This project will have a major impact on Lake Winnipesaukee and surrounding communities, so it’s important to have a strong presence at this meeting.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Gilford
Posts: 347
Thanks: 26
Thanked 69 Times in 42 Posts
|
![]()
Last night's ZBA meeting went nowhere for the applicants...other than the meeting being moved to the high school auditorium because there were too many people in the hearing room at town hall.
The first of their four applications were rejected by the ZBA as incomplete and the applicants withdrew the other three as they were incomplete, too. I expect they will refile their applications for the Special Exception and the three Variances they were requesting. When I spoke with their counsel he stated that they were going to make changes to their initial plans that might eliminate one or two of their ZBA applications, but that's all he was willing to say about the matter. |
![]() |
![]() |
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Weekend Pundit For This Useful Post: | ||
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 579
Thanks: 125
Thanked 247 Times in 133 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Gilford
Posts: 347
Thanks: 26
Thanked 69 Times in 42 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
The real power for dealing with the project is with the Planning Board. The ZBA is not required to allow public input as all they're interested in is processing the Special Exception and Variances for the project according to the zoning ordinances and/or state laws. However, the Planning Board is required to allow public input. Both proponents and opponents can address the Planning Board after the applicants make their presentation and PB members ask their questions. Then the Board will open the hearing to the public so they can express their opinions and concerns, and asking questions of both the Board and the applicants if they so desire. Once the public has had their say the PB will close the public hearing and move on to other applicants. Once all of them have been heard, the PB will discuss and vote on each application in turn. The Board can approve the application as is, approve it but with conditions that must be met before the Chairman signs off, rejected with suggested changes to be made before reapplication, or outright rejection. Last edited by Weekend Pundit; 06-07-2024 at 09:34 PM. Reason: Typo |
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to Weekend Pundit For This Useful Post: | ||
ApS (06-08-2024) |
![]() |
#8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Welch Island and The Taylor Community
Posts: 3,305
Thanks: 1,227
Thanked 2,098 Times in 957 Posts
|
![]()
Article in today's Sun:
https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...12cf1832e.html The Planning Board has no authority to move ahead on the commercial function facility portion of the application unless and until the ZBA approves a special exception allowing such in the rural zone. The applicants must now start over with a new application to the ZBA. We live on Cherry Valley Road and have submitted written comments to both the ZBA and PB. If necessary we will resubmit our comments. Written comments are part of the official record for both boards. They will be back. So the opposition needs to be back as well. Alan |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 682
Thanks: 21
Thanked 94 Times in 63 Posts
|
![]()
A quote from the developer in the article: "We had planned to present our improved vision of creating a beautiful, serene place of celebration that would preserve more than 55% of the wooded land and be respectful of neighbors’ concerns. It was disappointing to be denied that opportunity"
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 579
Thanks: 125
Thanked 247 Times in 133 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 579
Thanks: 125
Thanked 247 Times in 133 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Although the Zoning board may not be required to allow public input (I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know if this is true or not), a cursory review of recent Alton Zoning Board Minutes shows that the Zoning Board typically opens the meetings to public input. Anyone can review minutes from prior ZBA meetings here: https://www.alton.nh.gov/node/74 I've also attached the minutes from the December 2023 meeting showing the ZBA opening the meeting to public input on an unrelated case. The opposition was fully prepared to speak at Thursday's meeting, and I have no doubt that the ZBA would have allowed public input. We will be ready to speak in opposition to the Special Exception for a Commercial Function Facility in a RURAL Zone when they come back. Last edited by Little Bear; 06-08-2024 at 01:54 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 59
Thanks: 5
Thanked 57 Times in 19 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
There is a fairly big legal hurdle to obtain a variance. Essentially (and overly simplistically) there must be a hardship inherent in the land for the ZBA to grant a variance. (Amongst other criteria) This is a tough burden to overcome, because the applicant needs to show a reason why the land can’t reasonably be used under the criteria as currently zoned. If the ZBA did grant a variance, an appeal of the variance through the court system often stands a good chance of getting overturned. A special exception has a lower legal burden, because the zoning ordinance specifically allows the use, provided the applicant can demonstrate that the use is appropriate for the specific parcel of land. Also, both the ZBA and the Planning Board are legally obligated to take testimony from any abutter, and any member of the public that can demonstrate a direct impact attributable to the proposed development. Nearly every community in NH takes a very liberal view of this provision, and they generally allow testimony from any member of the public. If they didn’t take that testimony, they would have no way of determining whether or not a party is directly impacted. Lastly, the Planning Board is probably the least likely approval that can be successfully appealed. If the ZBA grants approval, and there is no appeal to that approval, the variance runs with the land, and gives the applicant the right to build the use contemplated under the variance, subject to good engineering practice, suitable aesthetics, and a host of other criteria that the Planning Board can oversee. However, the Planning Board will have no right to deny the use itself, if the ZBA grants the variances/exceptions, and there is no successful appeal. If the parties aggrieved by this development want to stop the development, they would be well served to hire a top notch land use attorney NOW, so that the attorney can review the application, and provide sound testimony during the ZBA proceedings, that will support a future appeal. Trust me, the applicant is represented by legal counsel, and they know full well that if they can get to the Planning Board without a ZBA appeal, they are likely to prevail in the long run. The last thing those in opposition want to do is wait until the Planning Board proceedings. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Riviera For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
#13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Gilford year round, West Alton summers
Posts: 591
Thanks: 597
Thanked 202 Times in 101 Posts
|
![]()
The question is how many attorneys- land use specialty included - own property in Alton or Gilford (my guess is more than you think) and care enough to fight it as it may directly affect them?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 579
Thanks: 125
Thanked 247 Times in 133 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 59
Thanks: 5
Thanked 57 Times in 19 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
That said, these boards often don’t fully understand the laws, and they make unintentional mistakes. A good land use attorney can spot those mistakes, and turn them to the advantage of their client, be it a proponent of the development, or an opponent of the development. If there is a large group of community members that oppose the development, consider an e-mail or social media campaign to solicit funds for legal representation. In the near term, this won’t cost much, because the attorney is simply going to review the application, attend a couple of meetings, and provide proper testimony that might help the ZBA members understand the legal reasons why a variance might not be legally justifiable. The ZBA is really acting in a quasi-judicial capacity, and they can’t (or shouldn’t) be making a variance decision based upon personal preferences of the community members. They really need legal justification to render a decision, yet they’ll only hear one legal opinion if there is only counsel for the applicant presenting testimony. Nobody likes to have to hire attorneys, but I really feel that a small amount of legal expenditure at this juncture will really help concerned community members to understand the process, and be better equipped to handle a mistake by a local board of volunteers. FWIW, I know very little about this application, and have no opinion as to the actual ramification to community members. It may well be that opposition is overly concerned about the actual impacts. Conversely, we may all be getting an eyesore on what should justifiably remain rural. I just hate to see the community members get railroaded by wealthy landowners, who can afford any amount of legal expense to overcome local opposition. Get 10 people to donate $1,000 to a legal fund, and you’ll probably have enough to get somebody to review the application, appear at the public hearings, and provide a concise legal argument on behalf of an abutter. Trust me on this …. it’s a necessary expenditure to stop this thing, assuming it warrants being stopped. EDIT: I just read a news article that indicates the applicants have pulled the variance application, and are now only seeking special exceptions. I suspect they determined they were unlikely to prevail in a variance appeal. The special exceptions are less likely to be overturned on appeal, so I could make a case that an attorney would be less beneficial at this stage. Last edited by Riviera; 06-09-2024 at 05:54 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 579
Thanks: 125
Thanked 247 Times in 133 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Belmont, NH
Posts: 122
Thanks: 1
Thanked 58 Times in 33 Posts
|
![]()
Riviera is absolutely correct. Wishful thinking won't do much against a billionaire's legal team. Someone in Alton should set up a go fund me site to raise the money to hire an attorney to combat the Grimms. The time is now.
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to retired For This Useful Post: | ||
Little Bear (06-11-2024) |
![]() |
#18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Pennsyltuckey, Tuftonboro, Moultonborough
Posts: 1,500
Thanks: 375
Thanked 230 Times in 124 Posts
|
![]()
You're right, because in these scenarios, money almost always wins. Sad, but true.
__________________
"When I die, please don't let my wife sell my dive gear for what I told her I paid for it." |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 579
Thanks: 125
Thanked 247 Times in 133 Posts
|
![]()
Thank you for your suggestion. We are looking at this and other possibilities as we speak.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Gilford
Posts: 347
Thanks: 26
Thanked 69 Times in 42 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
In my years serving on planning boards, it hasn't been unusual for planning boards to give conditional approvals, meaning an approval that includes additional conditions such as receiving a variance or variances from the ZBA, approval of special exceptions, NHDES/EPA waivers, and so on. If those conditions aren't met then the site plan approval is null and void. In fact, that was how it was done for a long time and it wasn't until the past 10 years, more or less, that going to the ZBA prior to the Planning Board hearings was an option. (It was seen that doing this eliminated much of the back and forth between the PB and ZBA.) Generally overturning a ZBA decision requires taking it to court, something a lot of folks don't want to do, even if they should. To quote one of my favorite philosophers, Dennis Miller, "Of course this is just my opinion. I might be wrong." |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 4,365
Thanks: 1,351
Thanked 1,624 Times in 1,056 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 59
Thanks: 5
Thanked 57 Times in 19 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Section 1.06 of the Site Plan Review Regulations specifically requires that any required ZBA approvals must be obtained, and submitted as part of the Planning Board application, prior to the PB application being deemed complete. The PB will take no action until a complete application has been submitted. There are, however, provisions that would allow for a conceptual hearing prior to a ZBA approval. Some communities will permit the planning board to to review an application prior to a ZBA approval, but I don’t think it is the norm. Most communities want to see the lot become legally viable from a zoning standpoint, before a planning board spends time reviewing the specific details required for a site plan approval. There are also provisions in State law that allow for joint hearings of the PB and ZBA, but those provisions are rarely used, except in the instance of huge projects. Long story short, in this instance, they need a ZBA approval before they can submit a formal application the PB. I think Dennis got it right! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Riviera For This Useful Post: | ||
Little Bear (06-11-2024), Slickcraft (06-12-2024) |
![]() |
#23 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Gilford
Posts: 347
Thanks: 26
Thanked 69 Times in 42 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
I do know that the applicants did mention something about amending their site plan such that they wouldn't require as many variances. It will be interesting to see what they'll do to make that a possibility. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 682
Thanks: 21
Thanked 94 Times in 63 Posts
|
![]()
Isn't amending the site plan like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic? The main variance/exception they need is to put a huge commercial enterprise in an area zoned rural... that's a pretty significant exception and probably the main one causing the opposition. Fine tuning the rest of them strikes me as irrelevant.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 4,365
Thanks: 1,351
Thanked 1,624 Times in 1,056 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to Descant For This Useful Post: | ||
gravy boat (06-12-2024) |
![]() |
#26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Welch Island and The Taylor Community
Posts: 3,305
Thanks: 1,227
Thanked 2,098 Times in 957 Posts
|
![]()
As noted on the related Facebook group, the application to the PB has been withdrawn. https://www.alton.nh.gov/calendar
Not a surprise as they have to start over with a new application to the ZBA and the PB can not accept an application as complete unless and until the ZBA approves a special exception to allow the commercial event facility in the rural zone. Will they be back?? Does a bear s##t in the woods? When they do submit to the ZBA, written comments become part of the recorded. Comments should focus on the specific criteria that must be found true to grant a special exception. See page 75 of the zoning regulations. https://www.alton.nh.gov/forms/plann...gOrdinance.pdf Alan |
![]() |
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Slickcraft For This Useful Post: | ||
DotRat (06-18-2024), Little Bear (06-12-2024) |
![]() |
#27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: the left coast (Portland)and West Alton
Posts: 1,403
Thanks: 65
Thanked 259 Times in 176 Posts
|
![]()
I know of a land use attorney who has lake front property in the vicinity; I assume he reads this forum and would be interested provided his fee were taken care of.
__________________
basking in the benign indifference of the universe |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Welch Island and The Taylor Community
Posts: 3,305
Thanks: 1,227
Thanked 2,098 Times in 957 Posts
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to Slickcraft For This Useful Post: | ||
Little Bear (06-15-2024) |
![]() |
#29 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 2,390
Thanks: 1,289
Thanked 1,020 Times in 630 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Doesn't that mean they are biased towards every local business? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 682
Thanks: 21
Thanked 94 Times in 63 Posts
|
![]()
sounds like there ought to be an Alton Residents Association to counterbalance it...
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|