Is a permit needed to build a new one family residential house in Grafton?
What about the other unzoned communities: Unity, Lempster, Canaan, Alexandria, Groton, etc. (Full list (http://nh.gov/oep/programs/GIS/documents/zoning1117.pdf))
Here is the number of the selectman's office
(603) 523-7700
Yrp, Unity does have zoning:
http://www.nhes.state.nh.us/elmi/htmlprofiles/unity.html (http://www.nhes.state.nh.us/elmi/htmlprofiles/unity.html)
They just got it in the last election.
Whatever. I have no idea why we were making anti-zoning signs for Mary last March then. Find some more nits to pick.
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=265.0
Thanks for all of your suggestions.
If he changes his avatar, I'll stop deleting his posts.
Goodbye Baron. I didn't delete Zack's post because of content. I didn't read any of them. I deleted his posts because of his avatar which he used just to get the reaction he got.
If the site owner thinks i have been wrong doing this, they can take away my moderator powers and give them to you.
The most interesting thing I see in this topic is when President has an opportunity to provide some information we can actually use, he is silent.
:)
Hmmm....I like Lloyd. And he does useful things for Freedom in our Lifetimes.
Are there a lot of posts missing suddenly?
Quote from: russellkanning on December 26, 2005, 09:40 AM NHFT
Are there a lot of posts missing suddenly?
post, post, post, postWhere'd they go? ;D
I had to read between the lines for the this one. ;D
Karma for Lloyd.
Yay for property rights! 8)
Well, more like, yay for telling others off when they think they can say whatever they want on your property >:D
Earlier tonight, I was reading the zoning ordinance for Berlin. Not only is Berlin the only city in the north country, it's heavily Democrat (union mill workers, etc.). And so, they have much of what you'd expect from a city council/manager/mayor form of government.
The zoning ordinance is 117 pages long, and is highly restrictive about what you can or can't do in your home, if it involves visitors or clients.
Their "sexually oriented business" zoning restriction was hilarious. Aside from the normal restrictions, they ban SOBs within 1,000 feet of city boundaries. Ummmm, well, duhhhh... the entire developed portion of Berlin is within 1,000 feet of borders with Gorham, Success, or Milan.
I hope to be working in Berlin, but I doubt we'll live there. We'd rather be in Milan, Randolph, or even Stark (which is tiny, but has no zoning). There are a couple of properties in Berlin we'd like to buy, where Mary could have a grooming shop at home; we might consider those. We still aim to homeschool John David wherever we land, but we expect a fight because we're a cash cow. Schools get a special stipend for children/students of feral gummint employees, and we don't expect them to let go of that easily.
Kevin
Quote from: KBCraig on December 27, 2005, 01:28 AM NHFT
Aside from the normal restrictions, they ban SOBs within 1,000 feet of city boundaries. Ummmm, well, duhhhh... the entire developed portion of Berlin is within 1,000 feet of borders with Gorham, Success, or Milan.
I had to read this twice. I was thinking 'How can they determine if you are an SOB' :)
Quote from: Dreepa on December 24, 2005, 02:56 PM NHFT
Here is the number of the selectman's office
(603) 523-7700
http://townofgrafton.com
Town of Grafton
Office of the Selectmen
Fax 603-523-4026
Email-grafton_twn@endor.com
Stephen Darrow, Chairman
Frank Neufell, Selectman
Jennie Joyce, Selectman
Kelli Morton, Administrative Assistant
Please contact the Selectmen?s Office if you need/have:
v Questions about Building Notifications
Quote from: Lloyd Danforth on December 26, 2005, 08:05 AM NHFT
The most interesting thing I see in this topic is when President has an opportunity to provide some information we can actually use, he is silent.
Who is the "we" you speak of? Do you have a turd in your pocket?
Maybe I did respond and my post was deleted. I can't figure out why my posts get deleted when they do. Have you ever deleted any of my posts Lloyd?
You also should have read Zack's posts before you deleted them, as he proablaby answered the question. You should have deleted his avatar if that was the problem, not the posts.
http://freetownproject.com/new_hampshire_town.html
Quote
We have just discovered that the Town of Grafton has something called a "BUILDING NOTIFICATION". Seems the Selectmen require you to ask them like they're your mommy if you want to build on your own Private Property. This somewhat negates John Babiarz's belief that, since there is no such thing as a "Certificate of Occupancy", the Town of Grafton respects Private Property Rights.
We'll just have to work around that and keep taking names. So far it doesn't seem to be abused, but of course that's how ALL Oppression starts! It may be that it is not a matter of PERMISSION, but if not then why require it at all? The fact is that the Selectmen "REVIEW" the Notifications, and that's scary.
I think it may have more to do with the planning board than the selectmen.
Grafton does not have a zoning board, but it does have a planning board and some zoning regulations, like 2 acre min lot size and only one permanent living structure per lot. Even if they get voted out, it takes 2 years for the zoning regulations to go away.
Also, at the 2005 deliberative session John Babiarz was asked to talk about the warrant article to get rid of the planning board. He said he feared a Carl Dregga situation is developing.
Oh, you can also check with Tim Condon, as he just bought some property in Grafton.
http://fl.rlc.org/
Quote
State e-newsletter, Third Quarter, 2005
...
9. Condon stakes claim in the Free State
Florida RLCer Tim Condon, currently of Tampa and an active RLC activist in both Florida and New Hampshire, has just closed on a piece of property in Grafton, NH. The move is part of his commitment to the Free State Project, an organized libertarian migration to New Hampshire. Tim wants you as a neighbor. For more info, see www.freestateproject.org.
Quote from: dead president on December 31, 2005, 02:49 PM NHFT
http://freetownproject.com/new_hampshire_town.html
Quote(quote from Zack):
We have just discovered that the Town of Grafton has something called a "BUILDING NOTIFICATION". Seems the Selectmen require you to ask them like they're your mommy if you want to build on your own Private Property. This somewhat negates John Babiarz's belief that, since there is no such thing as a "Certificate of Occupancy", the Town of Grafton respects Private Property Rights.
We'll just have to work around that and keep taking names. So far it doesn't seem to be abused, but of course that's how ALL Oppression starts! It may be that it is not a matter of PERMISSION, but if not then why require it at all? The fact is that the Selectmen "REVIEW" the Notifications, and that's scary.
I think it may have more to do with the planning board than the selectmen.
Nope, read up on how Grafton Government works, the BOARD OF SELECTMEN reviews each Building Notification, and they feel that you can't Build unless they are persuaded to "Sign" it.
Dig this:
http://www.freetownproject.com/efocus29.html
Quote
Building Notification ? Michael and Karen Selinga, Map 3, Lot 1008, Brock Hill Road: A building notification for an addition to an existing building was signed by the Board for Michael and Karen Selinga.
... and:
Quote
Building Notification: Discussion ensued that a new property owner on Millbrook has begun construction of an addition without a building notification being approved by the Selectboard. There was also a question of proper septage disposal. Bonnie will send a letter requesting information on both.
... and:
Quote
Building Notification ? Merle Kenyon, Island Road, Map 16, Lot 0089, Russell Dubuc, Main Street, Map 17, Lot 0233: The Board reviewed and signed a request from Merle Kenyon, Island Road and one for Russell Dubuc, Main Street. Bonnie asked the Board if there was a fee for Dubuc for the shed. The Board said that there were no fees for anything that did not constitute living space. The Board instructed Bonnie to send a letter to Mr. Dubuc instructing him that he needs to request driveway construction permission from the State of New Hampshire as his property is on Route 4.
... and:
Quote
Michele Fairbrothers ? Building Notification ? Driveway Permit: The Board reviewed 3 letters sent to Michele Fairbrothers, Wild Meadow Road; (1) building notification permits required by the Town of Grafton, (2) the need for a Town approved driveway and (3) property dispute. The Board noted that Ms. Fairbrothers has failed to respond to any of the letters and that there are complaints about the number of mobile homes on the property, the wires and water lines running across the road, and obstructions in the road/town right-of-way, making unsafe travel along the road. Ms. Fairbrothers was sent a letter, at the direction of New England Municipal Consultants, Ltd, suggesting she seek legal opinion regarding the property dispute, the driveway issue will be turned over to the Grafton Planning Board and the Selectmen will send a certified letter to Ms. Fairbrothers informing her that she has until June 15th to comply with Town regulations, clean up the property and remove things from the Town right-of-way.
Quote
Grafton does not have a zoning board, but it does have a planning board and some zoning regulations, like 2 acre min lot size and only one permanent living structure per lot.
A 2-acre lot minimum is NOT ZONING. It doesn't regulate LAND USE, it regulates only SUBDIVIDING, which is entirely within the legal control of a Planning Board.
If they try to tell you what you may build on you lot, though, that IS Zoning and will be struck down in Court. There are plenty of precedents in New Hampshire Law. If they want to do that they have to get ZONING voted in - and they have always failed in every attempt!
Quote
Even if they get voted out, it takes 2 years for the zoning regulations to go away.
I don't know about that, but since there would then be no one to administer or enforce it....
Quote
Also, at the 2005 deliberative session John Babiarz was asked to talk about the warrant article to get rid of the planning board. He said he feared a Carl Dregga situation is developing.
Why would he use the word "fear"? Must have turned Pussy.
Quote from: zackbass on December 31, 2005, 03:42 PM NHFT
Why would he use the word "fear"? Must have turned Pussy.
You sound like you view "pussy" as a bad thing.
When did our presidente die?
Quote from: dead president on December 31, 2005, 02:49 PM NHFT
Maybe I did respond and my post was deleted. I can't figure out why my posts get deleted when they do. Have you ever deleted any of my posts Lloyd?
No
Quote
You also should have read Zack's posts before you deleted them, as he proablaby answered the question.
Sorry, I just assumed they concerned Pederastry
Quote from: Lloyd Danforth on December 31, 2005, 05:59 PM NHFT
Quote from: dead president on December 31, 2005, 02:49 PM NHFT
You also should have read Zack's posts before you deleted them, as he proablaby answered the question.
Sorry, I just assumed they concerned Pederastry
And why the fuck would you assume something like that? And why the fuck would you stop assuming it when I changed the avatar? And what the fuck is pederasty anyhow? Oh wait, here it is on Dictionary.com:
Quote
pederasty
n : sexual relations between a man and a boy (usually anal intercourse with the boy as a passive partner) [syn: paederasty]
Did your creepy imagination see my avatar depicting a boy taking it in the ass? The picture came right out of National Lampoon. Do you think that National Lampoon would dare to publish such a thing?
Quote from: zackbass on January 01, 2006, 01:17 AM NHFT
Did your creepy imagination see my avatar depicting a boy taking it in the ass?
I just figured you had a Smurf fixation. "Don't ask, don't tell."
Kevin
If I was building a house in Grafton I would follow the "don't ask don't tell" policy with anyone but my friends and neighbors. :)
I did a lot of work on a friends house a few years back. Turned carriage house into a studio, finished off a workroom, added a large dormer. All with no permits or permission. :)
Quote from: zackbass on December 31, 2005, 03:42 PM NHFT
Quote from: dead president on December 31, 2005, 02:49 PM NHFT
http://freetownproject.com/new_hampshire_town.html
Quote(quote from Zack):
We have just discovered that the Town of Grafton has something called a "BUILDING NOTIFICATION". Seems the Selectmen require you to ask them like they're your mommy if you want to build on your own Private Property. This somewhat negates John Babiarz's belief that, since there is no such thing as a "Certificate of Occupancy", the Town of Grafton respects Private Property Rights.
We'll just have to work around that and keep taking names. So far it doesn't seem to be abused, but of course that's how ALL Oppression starts! It may be that it is not a matter of PERMISSION, but if not then why require it at all? The fact is that the Selectmen "REVIEW" the Notifications, and that's scary.
I think it may have more to do with the planning board than the selectmen.
Nope, read up on how Grafton Government works, the BOARD OF SELECTMEN reviews each Building Notification, and they feel that you can't Build unless they are persuaded to "Sign" it.
I think the building notication power comes from the planning board, and is delegated to the selectmen. Let's look at the RSAs
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/indexes/674.html
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/674/674-1.htm
674:1 Duties of the Planning Board
Quote
V. The planning board may, from time to time, recommend to the local legislative body amendments of the zoning ordinance or zoning map or additions thereto.
http://199.192.8.10/rsa/html/LXIV/674/674-36.htm
Quote
674:36 Subdivision Regulations.
I. Before the planning board exercises its powers under RSA 674:35, the planning board shall adopt subdivision regulations according to the procedures required by RSA 675:6.
II. The subdivision regulations which the planning board adopts may:
...
(h) Require that the land indicated on plats submitted to the planning board shall be of such character that it can be used for building purposes without danger to health;
(i) Prescribe minimum areas of lots so as to assure conformance with local zoning ordinances and to assure such additional areas as may be needed for each lot for on-site sanitary facilities;
...
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/674/674-43.htm
Quote674:43 Power to Review Site Plans.
I. A municipality, having adopted a zoning ordinance as provided in RSA 674:16, and where the planning board has adopted subdivision regulations as provided in RSA 674:36, may by ordinance or resolution further authorize the planning board to require preliminary review of site plans and to review and approve or disapprove site plans for the development or change or expansion of use of tracts for nonresidential uses or for multi-family dwelling units, which are defined as any structures containing more than 2 dwelling units, whether or not such development includes a subdivision or resubdivision of the site.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/674/674-35.htm
Quote
674:35 Power to Regulate Subdivisions.
I. A municipality may by ordinance or resolution authorize the planning board to require preliminary review of subdivisions, and to approve or disapprove, in its discretion, plats, and to approve or disapprove plans showing the extent to which and the manner in which streets within subdivisions shall be graded and improved and to which streets water, sewer, and other utility mains, piping, connections or other facilities within subdivisions shall be installed.
II. The planning board of a municipality shall have the authority to regulate the subdivision of land under the enactment procedures of RSA 675:6. The ordinance or resolution which authorizes the planning board to regulate the subdivision of land shall make it the duty of the city clerk, town clerk, clerk of district commissioners or other appropriate recording official to file with the register of deeds of the county in which the municipality is located a certificate of notice showing that the planning board has been so authorized, giving the date of such authorization.
III. The planning board shall not limit the number of building permits that may be issued except in accordance with an innovative land use control ordinance addressing timing incentives and phased development under RSA 674:21 and adopted under RSA 674:16; or an ordinance to regulate and control the timing of development, adopted under RSA 674:22; or an ordinance to regulate growth via interim regulation, adopted under RSA 674:23. This paragraph shall not be construed to limit the planning board's authority to deny a subdivision application on the basis that it is scattered or premature.
Quote
Dig this:
http://www.freetownproject.com/efocus29.html
Sounds to me like the planning board delegated athority for building notifiction aproval to the selectmen. It is my understanding that if the planning board goes away, the building notification would also go away, and any zoning ordances would also go away.
Quote
Quote
Grafton does not have a zoning board, but it does have a planning board and some zoning regulations, like 2 acre min lot size and only one permanent living structure per lot.
A 2-acre lot minimum is NOT ZONING. It doesn't regulate LAND USE, it regulates only SUBDIVIDING, which is entirely within the legal control of a Planning Board.
If they try to tell you what you may build on you lot, though, that IS Zoning and will be struck down in Court. There are plenty of precedents in New Hampshire Law. If they want to do that they have to get ZONING voted in - and they have always failed in every attempt!
Umm, I was wrong. It is not a zoning regulation. Grafton has ZONING ORDINANCES. And they got voted in over 20 years ago.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/674/674-16.htm
QuoteZoning
Section 674:16
674:16 Grant of Power.
I. For the purpose of promoting the health, safety, or the general welfare of the community, the local legislative body of any city, town, or county in which there are located unincorporated towns or unorganized places is authorized to adopt or amend a zoning ordinance under the ordinance enactment procedures of RSA 675:2-5. The zoning ordinance shall be designed to regulate and restrict:
(a) The height, number of stories and size of buildings and other structures;
(b) Lot sizes, the percentage of a lot that may be occupied, and the size of yards, courts and other open spaces;
(c) The density of population in the municipality; and
(d) The location and use of buildings, structures and land used for business, industrial, residential, or other purposes.
Quote
Quote
Even if they get voted out, it takes 2 years for the zoning regulations to go away.
I don't know about that, but since there would then be no one to administer or enforce it....
That is just what I have been told. I don't remember if it was written into the Grafton zoning ordinances, or it is a state thing. But if the zoning board gets voted out, it will take two years for the zoning ordnaces to go away.
Quote
Quote
Also, at the 2005 deliberative session John Babiarz was asked to talk about the warrant article to get rid of the planning board. He said he feared a Carl Dregga situation is developing.
Why would he use the word "fear"? Must have turned Pussy.
I don't know if he used the word "fear". I meant he explained it as something he thought may happen, and he didn't want it to. I didn't mean he said he was ascared. I think he was being a politician.
Quote from: dead president on January 01, 2006, 01:21 PM NHFT
Quote from: zackbass on December 31, 2005, 03:42 PM NHFT
A 2-acre lot minimum is NOT ZONING. It doesn't regulate LAND USE, it regulates only SUBDIVIDING, which is entirely within the legal control of a Planning Board.
If they try to tell you what you may build on you lot, though, that IS Zoning and will be struck down in Court. There are plenty of precedents in New Hampshire Law. If they want to do that they have to get ZONING voted in - and they have always failed in every attempt!
Umm, I was wrong. It is not a zoning regulation. Grafton has ZONING ORDINANCES. And they got voted in over 20 years ago.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/674/674-16.htm
QuoteZoning
Section 674:16
674:16 Grant of Power.
I. For the purpose of promoting the health, safety, or the general welfare of the community, the local legislative body of any city, town, or county in which there are located unincorporated towns or unorganized places is authorized to adopt or amend a zoning ordinance under the ordinance enactment procedures of RSA 675:2-5. The zoning ordinance shall be designed to regulate and restrict:
(a) The height, number of stories and size of buildings and other structures;
(b) Lot sizes, the percentage of a lot that may be occupied, and the size of yards, courts and other open spaces;
(c) The density of population in the municipality; and
(d) The location and use of buildings, structures and land used for business, industrial, residential, or other purposes.
WRONG!!!
Where were you in March? The BAD PEOPLE of the Town of Grafton attempted to adopt a ZONING ORDINANCE in response to my challenge a few months before (adopt Zoning if you don't want us to take charge of the Town Government), and the GOOD PEOPLE of the Town of Grafton voted it down!
All you have done here is quote the Statute (RSA) that gives the Town the authority to enact Zoning Ordinances, and in fact this proves my point, since it says that it is a ZONING ORDINANCE - IF ENACTED - that allows a Zoning Board to regulate and restrict what may be built on the land after it is SubDivided. Since (despite what you claim) the Town of Grafton has NOT adopted any Zoning Ordinance that restricts what may be built on a lot, the Town of Grafton Board of Selectmen has no authority whatsoever to say how many structures may be built on a Lot, or how many people may live on that Lot.
Even when a Zoning Ordinance has been adopted (like the minimal one that was in effect in Unity until 2005, ask Mary Gere), if it does not specifically give the Town the right to restrict a certain aspect of Building on Lots, it does not have that authority until the Zoning Ordinance is AMENDED - by a Vote of the Townspeople!!! And we know that the Good People of Grafton are NOT going to approve any such thing.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/675/675-3.htm
Quote
675:3 Method of Enactment in Certain Towns and Village Districts. ?
I. Any town not operating under the town council form of government, or any village district which is specifically authorized by law to enact a zoning ordinance, shall establish and amend a zoning ordinance, historic district ordinance, or building code upon the affirmative vote by ballot of a majority of the legal voters present and voting on the day of the meeting, as provided in paragraph VII. Any proposed zoning ordinance, as submitted by a planning board or any amendment to an existing zoning ordinance as proposed by a planning board, board of selectmen or village district commission shall be submitted to the voters of a town or village district in the manner prescribed in this section.
Makes sense to me......especially when you are just fixing up old places.
Quote from: zackbass on January 01, 2006, 01:40 PM NHFT
WRONG!!!
Where were you in March? The BAD PEOPLE of the Town of Grafton attempted to adopt a ZONING ORDINANCE in response to my challenge a few months before (adopt Zoning if you don't want us to take charge of the Town Government), and the GOOD PEOPLE of the Town of Grafton voted it down!
Too bad you don't know what you are talking about.
I was in Grafton voting. Where were you?
Did you see the ballot?
I did. There was no attempt to adopt a ZONING ORDINANCE on the ballot in march. Who feeds you this shit? There was a question asking if the planning board should develop a zoning ordinance that would be voted on the next year. It failed
There was also a quesion asking if the planning board should be abolished, which would also get rid of the ZONING ORDINANCES after 2 years. It failed.
QuoteAll you have done here is quote the Statute (RSA) that gives the Town the authority to enact Zoning Ordinances, and in fact this proves my point, since it says that it is a ZONING ORDINANCE - IF ENACTED - that allows a Zoning Board to regulate and restrict what may be built on the land after it is SubDivided. Since (despite what you claim) the Town of Grafton has NOT adopted any Zoning Ordinance that restricts what may be built on a lot, the Town of Grafton Board of Selectmen has no authority whatsoever to say how many structures may be built on a Lot, or how many people may live on that Lot.
Even when a Zoning Ordinance has been adopted (like the minimal one that was in effect in Unity until 2005, ask Mary Gere), if it does not specifically give the Town the right to restrict a certain aspect of Building on Lots, it does not have that authority until the Zoning Ordinance is AMENDED - by a Vote of the Townspeople!!! And we know that the Good People of Grafton are NOT going to approve any such thing.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/675/675-3.htm
Quote
675:3 Method of Enactment in Certain Towns and Village Districts. ?
I. Any town not operating under the town council form of government, or any village district which is specifically authorized by law to enact a zoning ordinance, shall establish and amend a zoning ordinance, historic district ordinance, or building code upon the affirmative vote by ballot of a majority of the legal voters present and voting on the day of the meeting, as provided in paragraph VII. Any proposed zoning ordinance, as submitted by a planning board or any amendment to an existing zoning ordinance as proposed by a planning board, board of selectmen or village district commission shall be submitted to the voters of a town or village district in the manner prescribed in this section.
The people of Grafton did vote on the ZONING ORDINANCE back in the 1970's. The 2 acre minimum lot size is a ZONING ORDINANCE according to NH law.
What part of this do you not understand?
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/674/674-16.htm
Quote
Zoning
Section 674:16
674:16 Grant of Power.
I. For the purpose of promoting the health, safety, or the general welfare of the community, the local legislative body of any city, town, or county in which there are located unincorporated towns or unorganized places is authorized to adopt or amend a zoning ordinance under the ordinance enactment procedures of RSA 675:2-5. The zoning ordinance shall be designed to regulate and restrict:
...
(b) Lot sizes, the percentage of a lot that may be occupied, and the size of yards, courts and other open spaces;
...
How are you defining ZONING ORDINANCE?
Quote from: dead president on January 01, 2006, 03:19 PM NHFT
Quote from: zackbass on January 01, 2006, 01:40 PM NHFT
All you have done here is quote the Statute (RSA) that gives the Town the authority to enact Zoning Ordinances, and in fact this proves my point, since it says that it is a ZONING ORDINANCE - IF ENACTED - that allows a Zoning Board to regulate and restrict what may be built on the land after it is SubDivided. Since (despite what you claim) the Town of Grafton has NOT adopted any Zoning Ordinance that restricts what may be built on a lot, the Town of Grafton Board of Selectmen has no authority whatsoever to say how many structures may be built on a Lot, or how many people may live on that Lot.
Even when a Zoning Ordinance has been adopted (like the minimal one that was in effect in Unity until 2005, ask Mary Gere), if it does not specifically give the Town the right to restrict a certain aspect of Building on Lots, it does not have that authority until the Zoning Ordinance is AMENDED - by a Vote of the Townspeople!!! And we know that the Good People of Grafton are NOT going to approve any such thing.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/675/675-3.htm
Quote
675:3 Method of Enactment in Certain Towns and Village Districts. ?
I. Any town not operating under the town council form of government, or any village district which is specifically authorized by law to enact a zoning ordinance, shall establish and amend a zoning ordinance, historic district ordinance, or building code upon the affirmative vote by ballot of a majority of the legal voters present and voting on the day of the meeting, as provided in paragraph VII. Any proposed zoning ordinance, as submitted by a planning board or any amendment to an existing zoning ordinance as proposed by a planning board, board of selectmen or village district commission shall be submitted to the voters of a town or village district in the manner prescribed in this section.
The people of Grafton did vote on the ZONING ORDINANCE back in the 1970's.
How do you know that? Everything anyone else has EVER seen says that they have NEVER enacted a Zonning Ordinance - which, by State Law, must be passed by popular Vote of the Voters of the Town affected.
Quote
The 2 acre minimum lot size is a ZONING ORDINANCE according to NH law.
You are DEAD WRONG. State Law says clearly that THERE IS NO ZONING ORDINANCE UNLESS THE VOTERS PASS ONE. And when they DO pass one, THEY are the ones who by that Vote have decided what it consists of; there is NO STATE ZONING ORDINANCE.
Quote
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/674/674-16.htm
Quote
Zoning
Section 674:16
674:16 Grant of Power.
I. For the purpose of promoting the health, safety, or the general welfare of the community, the local legislative body of any city, town, or county in which there are located unincorporated towns or unorganized places is authorized to adopt or amend a zoning ordinance under the ordinance enactment procedures of RSA 675:2-5. The zoning ordinance shall be designed to regulate and restrict:
...
(b) Lot sizes, the percentage of a lot that may be occupied, and the size of yards, courts and other open spaces;
...
How are you defining ZONING ORDINANCE?
A ZONING ORDINANCE, in the case of a Selectmen type Town Government, is something that is passed by the Voters of the Town. No Planning Board, and no Board of Selectmen, can enact any such Ordinance or any Regulation thereunto pertaining; ONLY THE VOTERS can do that, and they have rejected it!!!!
I already cited that:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/675/675-3.htm
Quote
675:3 Method of Enactment in Certain Towns and Village Districts. ?
I. Any town not operating under the town council form of government, or any village district which is specifically authorized by law to enact a zoning ordinance, shall establish and amend a zoning ordinance, historic district ordinance, or building code upon the affirmative vote by ballot of a majority of the legal voters present and voting on the day of the meeting, as provided in paragraph VII. Any proposed zoning ordinance, as submitted by a planning board or any amendment to an existing zoning ordinance as proposed by a planning board, board of selectmen or village district commission shall be submitted to the voters of a town or village district in the manner prescribed in this section.
Quote from: dead president on January 01, 2006, 03:19 PM NHFT
The people of Grafton did vote on the ZONING ORDINANCE back in the 1970's. The 2 acre minimum lot size is a ZONING ORDINANCE according to NH law.
BullShit.
Look at http://www.nhes.state.nh.us/elmi/htmlprofiles/pdfs/grafton.pdf - it clearly shows that THERE IS NO ZONING BOARD.
And now look at http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/673/673-1.htm
Quote
673:1 Establishment of Local Land Use Boards. ?
....
IV. Every zoning ordinance adopted by a local legislative body shall include provisions for the establishment of a zoning board of adjustment.
1. There is no Zoning Board of Adjustment.
2. Every Zoning Ordinance has a Zoning Board of Adjustment.
therefore...
3. There is no Zoning Ordinance.
Q.E.D.
Here is a letter I got from Mary Gere, Unity SelectPerson, on 12/9/2003:
==========================================================================
==========================================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Gere1356@****
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 2:03 PM
Subject: Zoning et al
Hi Zack and Michael,
As Michael went off forum with these discussions I though it was probably worth joining you both there. It is a bit off topic, but will definitely effect all of us in the free state. I have seen some real division on this issue and in a side bar had a big to-do with Mike Lorrey about it. I honestly feel that Mike L. is brainwashed into believing all the crap the "zoning Nazi's" have been peddling for years.
I am on the ground here in NH. Have been an on and off again activist for the NHLP and have been active in my local politics for better than 10 years. Any time the word "zoning" came up our town voted it down in a big way. I feel proud that I have been a part of that action. Two years ago they put a new name on the regulations. This was with the promise that the only thing they were looking to regulate was that the town as a whole did not want a private company moving in and starting a toxic waste dump or nuclear dump. The whole town is one zone-residential/business/ agriculture. I didn't fight this one actively as I saw no harm legally in what they were doing at that point. Now we begin to see the changes.
Background:
Unity has had subdivision regulations for about 20 years. None of the forum talks about these. They are more rascally then the zoning in there own way, the only difference is that if you don't plan to subdivide then they don't apply. So these regulations in Unity dictated how small you can make the lots, how far from the border you can build, how many feet of road frontage are required, they specify that you can only have one residence per lot, set back requirements to water, and the lot. Well, all these previous years the planning boards had been using the subdivision regs as zoning. This is illegal, but no one complained. Subdivision is only supposed to be based on public safety: i.e. road traffic, fire hazard type things.
My first year as a selectman, I asked the town attorney if these regulations applied to the town as a whole and he calmly read the front page "Sub-Division Regulations". There is your answer, they only apply to subdivisions. Ok, I knew this, but wanted legal opinion. The town planning board continued in this path for another 8 years. When another man was elected selectman and was also an engineer and had to deal with these boards around the state and was getting pretty fed up with their arrogant attitude and ludicrous demands he began really pushing the idea that what our planning board was doing was illegal and that if pushed the board of selectmen could not and would not defend any of their actions in court. We also would not hold up their decisions. I knew I wouldn't anyway, but now here I had an ally. Plain and simple truth was that you cannot use subdivision regulations for land use regulations. They are a separate set of laws.
These laws are also implemented very differently. Subdivision regulations are passed without public votes by the planning board which is why they loved them so much. Hold a public hearing that no one attended and pass what ever you want without so much as a peep and it wasn't until someone was looking to subdivide that they even knew. Plus it allowed them to change things as they went. Most people don't have the finances to fight city hall.
Zoning is passed by the voters on the ballot at your annual town meetings. Zoning is therefore harder to get but also harder to get rid of since the voters themselves put it into place. Anyone that tells you oh don't worry you just go down and get a variance is full of sh--! These ordinances are made not to give variances! And these boards get their jollies off making other people twist in their seats. It is a power trip.
Update:
Since I have been in town no one has challenged the subdivision regulations and most went along or didn't divide. Since the planning board finally got it through their heads that they had no zoning, even with their land use ordinance, they have been in a total panic! What will we do? How will we control growth? How can we get these stupid people to understand that this is for their own good?
(Side bar: There land use ordinance voted in by the voters was done incorrectly and therefore void so even though any private firm that wanted to come in and start a private toxic waste dump could have easily done so since the permits are through the state and the only recourse the town had was to charge them $100 a day which they could easily have added onto their tipping fees the board is in more of a panic that they don't have their "perceived" protection.)
And since this apparent lack of control and panic over the uncontrolled growth do you know what happened?? Oh my word! There was one $350,000 + house office building built on a property already having a residence! What a horror! (Sarcasm here)
What fluxed them here was that they were not conferred with! Can you believe the arrogance? They didn't know what these people were doing! Who cares? What business is it of these busy buddies anyway? The guy is doing everything right! He put in a septic system, approved by the state, got a foundation super insulated poured by professionals, ordered and purchased a 5 piece pre fabricated home and was having it professionally installed and for some reason these pea brains were all upset!
Zack, I think you have the right idea about zoning and what it means to people wanting to live their own life is peace, BUT you go about it the wrong way! Please don't accost me with your famous dismissal nastiness that you have become known for. I am saying that what you feel in your heart is right. And I know from past readings of yours that you take everything personally and are tired of playing nice and not getting anywhere, but I can speak from honest to God experience that if you work with your neighbors from the perspective of what it will take away from them (not you) and what it will give to them (not yourself) that you can get through to them and get their votes going the right way. Explain that this is not just your pet project that will get thumbs down on but anything they think they might want to do in the future would also be in question. I went through my town and stopped at everyone's house that was a "nonconforming" house. That means that everyone on the edge of the road can do NOTHING to their house (even on the conforming side of it) without getting permission from some board. Since I know you traveled up this way, think back to all the houses up near the road, they are all nonconforming. If those homeowners want to change their back windows into bow windows, they have to get a variance! When people begin to see the far reaching effect these types of regulations have it is incredible the amount of support you get. Same as lets say they want to build a small cottage for their aging parents to stay close to them but still have their independence, or a camp for seasonally visiting children and grandchildren? Zoning prohibits all this. Another example I saw recently, in Mike Lorrey's backyard of Lebanon, a fellow has a small lot in a neighborhood or small lots. His lot is narrow and where it goes far back it also goes straight up. He wanted a garage, he ran into a foul of the zoning regs since it would put his building too close to the abutters property. But the neighbor was using the other side of his property and the garage wouldn't impact his place at all nor his view of the woods in between their homes. In order for this fellow to even have this "board" review his request there were hours of research, maps, plans, a questionnaire and a $500 nonrefundable fee! These are the types of things to cite with your argument, not the kill them all and let God sort them out type talk. It just makes people that otherwise wouldn't bond join forces to stop you. Move to a nice place, preferably without zoning, join some town boards to learn who is on the right side and who is on the wrong, galvanize proliberty people, that may not even know they are and then when the talk of zoning comes up you will already have your small army ready to stop it.
Mike I included you in all this as you were the one asking about zoning and the pros and cons. What kind of printing do you do? I am a nighttime supervisor of the press department at Dartmouth Printing in Hanover. Are you already in the state or planning to be soon? We do journal and magazine publications, mostly heat-set, high gloss full color but also some PMS.
Hopefully my history with this stuff has some value but like they say everyone has an opinion and if this doesn't seem to fit into the queries and attitudes you were interested in just hit delete. If there is something I missed please email me back and I would be happy to correspond.
Mary already in NH and loving it
==========================================================================
==========================================================================
(Note that Selectmen and Planning Boarders do TRY to use Planning Laws as Zoning, but they will never prevail in Court. -- ZB)
This is VERY IMPORTANT. It is not nitpicking. The presence or absence of an ACTUAL ZONING ORDINANCE, PASSED BY THE VOTERS, is VERY IMPORTANT to how you proceed in Grafton or any other Town whose Government has SelectPersons.
And if you DO have a Zoning Ordinance in your Town, the exact wording is important; each Zoning Ordinance has its distinct set of Rules that you and the Town must follow.
Quote from: zackbass on January 01, 2006, 03:59 PM NHFT
Quote from: dead president on January 01, 2006, 03:19 PM NHFT
The people of Grafton did vote on the ZONING ORDINANCE back in the 1970's.
How do you know that? Everything anyone else has EVER seen says that they have NEVER enacted a Zonning Ordinance - which, by State Law, must be passed by popular Vote of the Voters of the Town affected.
I know because I attended the Jan, 4 2005 public hearing about abolishing the planning board, have seen the ordinance, and when it was voted on, and I also attended the 2005 deliberative session.
How about you? Who gave you the info that there is no zoning ordinance in Grafton? Name some names.
Don't say everyone, because I am telling you otherwise. I keep telling you that it was passed by a popular vote of the voters of Grafton. How do you think the 2 acre min came about?
Quote
Quote
The 2 acre minimum lot size is a ZONING ORDINANCE according to NH law.
You are DEAD WRONG. State Law says clearly that THERE IS NO ZONING ORDINANCE UNLESS THE VOTERS PASS ONE. And when they DO pass one, THEY are the ones who by that Vote have decided what it consists of; there is NO STATE ZONING ORDINANCE.
I keep telling you the voters did pass it in the 1970's. What part of that don't you get?
Quote
Quote
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/674/674-16.htm
Quote
Zoning
Section 674:16
674:16 Grant of Power.
I. For the purpose of promoting the health, safety, or the general welfare of the community, the local legislative body of any city, town, or county in which there are located unincorporated towns or unorganized places is authorized to adopt or amend a zoning ordinance under the ordinance enactment procedures of RSA 675:2-5. The zoning ordinance shall be designed to regulate and restrict:
...
(b) Lot sizes, the percentage of a lot that may be occupied, and the size of yards, courts and other open spaces;
...
How are you defining ZONING ORDINANCE?
A ZONING ORDINANCE, in the case of a Selectmen type Town Government, is something that is passed by the Voters of the Town. No Planning Board, and no Board of Selectmen, can enact any such Ordinance or any Regulation thereunto pertaining; ONLY THE VOTERS can do that, and they have rejected it!!!!
So you agree with me.
The town of Grafton has a Zoning Ordinance, it was passed by the voters of Grafton in the 1970's. Do I have to say that again? Was it big enough for you to see?
Quote from: zackbass on January 01, 2006, 04:10 PM NHFT
Quote from: dead president on January 01, 2006, 03:19 PM NHFT
The people of Grafton did vote on the ZONING ORDINANCE back in the 1970's. The 2 acre minimum lot size is a ZONING ORDINANCE according to NH law.
BullShit.
Look at http://www.nhes.state.nh.us/elmi/htmlprofiles/pdfs/grafton.pdf - it clearly shows that THERE IS NO ZONING BOARD.
No shit. Did anyone say there was?
Quote
And now look at http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/673/673-1.htm
Quote
673:1 Establishment of Local Land Use Boards. ?
....
IV. Every zoning ordinance adopted by a local legislative body shall include provisions for the establishment of a zoning board of adjustment.
Provisions for the establishment of a zoning board is not the same thing as establishment of a zoning board. You know that.
Quote
1. There is no Zoning Board of Adjustment.
2. Every Zoning Ordinance has a Zoning Board of Adjustment.
therefore...
3. There is no Zoning Ordinance.
Number 2 is wrong..therefore #3 is wrong....and therefore you are wrong.
Show me where #2 is stated in the law.
But let's look at more of the RSA you just quoted:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/673/673-19.htm
Quote
673:19 Effect of Abolishing Planning Boards. ? Upon the effective date of the abolition of a planning board, all land use control activities in the municipality formerly performed by the planning board shall cease. Existing zoning ordinances shall remain in effect following the abolition date for a period not to exceed 2 years from the date of such action, but no amendment to a zoning ordinance requiring action by the former planning board shall be permitted.
So do you care to explain why the 2 acre min would stay around for 2 years after the planning board goes away?
I will tell you why. Because it is a FUCKING ZONING ORDINANCE, and it was voted on by the voters of Grafton.
El Presidente died? So he is back to haunt us? ???
I think two guys are arguing but I can't hear the conversation.
This could be the spookiest ghost story told at the jamboree ..... the day the troll came back from the dead. :)
Quote from: russellkanning on January 01, 2006, 06:55 PM NHFT
I think two guys are arguing but I can't hear the conversation.
At least they are somewhat on topic. I just hope they give a final summary after they are done.
But how can they if they disagree?
If I was you .... I would just find a nice quiet place and ignore the bureaucrats who think they are in authority over us.
But then again .... I want freedom now.
Quote from: dead president on January 01, 2006, 06:00 PM NHFT
How do you think the 2 acre min came about?
Isn't that a pretty common law? I know that is how it works inside my country. The regulation is that if you are going to have a septic system; then you need 2 acres.
Quote from: dead president on January 01, 2006, 06:00 PM NHFT
How about you? Who gave you the info that there is no zoning ordinance in Grafton? Name some names.
Don't say everyone, because I am telling you otherwise. I keep telling you that it was passed by a popular vote of the voters of Grafton. How do you think the 2 acre min came about?
You are talking about the PLANNING BOARD. They have the authority to refuse to allow anyone to SubDivide land into lots smaller than 2 acres.
THAT IS NOT ZONING.Please re-read Mary Gere's letter.
I believe you are confusing ZONING and PLANNING. That "Ordinance" you saw... was that, in actuality, a Warrant Article establishing the Planning Board? And then, since the Planning Board limits Lot sizes when land is SubDivided (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/674/674-35.htm), you erroneously conclude that that is Zoning. NO. Zoning is regulation of what you do with the land AFTER it is SubDivided; Planning regulates how you may SubDivide and has no further effect AFTER you manage to Subdivide the parcel. A Planning Board cannot control Land Use unless a Zoning Ordinance has been passed (and cannot exceed the explicit Rules laid down in that Ordinance), although it may control Lot Size WITHOUT A ZONING ORDINANCE. Thus, as Mary Gere says, they are not allowed to sneak in Rules that have not explicitly been approved by the Voters.
You claim to have seen a "Zoning Ordinance" that was passed in Grafton in the 1970's. It is important for us to see that please. Does it, as you claim, prodice for the establishment of a Zoning Board of Adjustment? I bet you $100 it does not and is therefore NOT a Zoning Ordinance. Wanna bet? Huh? Bet me?
We agree that Grafton never established a Zoning Board. Therefore if they thought they passed a Zoning Ordinance in the 1970's, it has no legal effect. There is PLENTY of precedent in the New Hampshire Courts that, without a Zoning Board of Adjustment, no Zoning can be enforced.
Quote from: russellkanning on January 01, 2006, 08:21 PM NHFT
If I was you .... I would just find a nice quiet place and ignore the bureaucrats who think they are in authority over us.
But then again .... I want freedom now.
That hasn't been working out, has it? Last year I got a notice saying that, if I didn't please the BTK-Killer guy who stalks our neighborhood, I would be fined $1,000 PER DAY until I mowed my grass to his satisfaction.
Innocent people have lost their homes. People who have offered Violence to no one are being imprisoned. We have to take charge of a Local Government (at the very least) in order to have any real protection.
The "bad" publicity that results from that first-in-history act just might give Hope to others who want
FREEDOM NOW! - and they just might expand on that victory. There is of course no chance that libertarianism will expand very far; the best goal is to expand it just enough to protect those who are already libertarians, and leave the other 99% to continue to control their neighbors - just so long as we are not those neighbors.
The effect of the "bad" publicity on the Evil 99% is unimportant; if we let the timid cause us to take those assholes into account we will never ACT. All that matters is, are we reaching those who want
FREEDOM NOW! and are willing to let their neighbors be Free?
Quote from: dead president on January 01, 2006, 06:19 PM NHFT
Quote from: zackbass on January 01, 2006, 04:10 PM NHFT
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/673/673-1.htm
Quote
673:1 Establishment of Local Land Use Boards. ?
....
IV. Every zoning ordinance adopted by a local legislative body shall include provisions for the establishment of a zoning board of adjustment.
Provisions for the establishment of a zoning board is not the same thing as establishment of a zoning board. You know that.
You want every
i dotted, okay, the Voters of Grafton never passed a Zoning Ordinance because they never passed an Ordinance that included
provisions for the establishment of a zoning board of adjustment.
So here it is for you:
1. The Voters of the Town of Grafton never passed any Ordinance with provisions for a Zoning Board of Adjustment.
2. Every Zoning Ordinance has provisions for a Zoning Board of Adjustment.
therefore...
3. There is no Zoning Ordinance in the Town of Grafton.
(#2 is written down for you in New Hampshire Law -
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/673/673-1.htm)
Quote from: eukreign on January 01, 2006, 08:05 PM NHFT
I just hope they give a final summary after they are done.
To answer your original question....
Grafton has building notification. It was passed by popular vote in 1979, as article 14, and amended in 1988 with article 24.
A Notification of Constuction is reviewed and approved by the selectmen prior to commencment of such construction. Does not apply to non-inhabited outbuildings, however the selectmen request that a notification in writing of such construction be submitted to them.
Quote from: zackbass on January 02, 2006, 05:05 AM NHFT
You are talking about the PLANNING BOARD. They have the authority to refuse to allow anyone to SubDivide land into lots smaller than 2 acres.
THAT IS NOT ZONING.
No I am not. I am talking about article 12, 1976 town meeting.
Quote
Please re-read Mary Gere's letter.
You re-read it. It proves my point.
QuoteThat "Ordinance" you saw... was that, in actuality, a Warrant Article establishing the Planning Board?
No. The Ordinance was Article 12, 1976 town meeting. The planning board was already established at that time.
QuoteAnd then, since the Planning Board limits Lot sizes when land is SubDivided (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/674/674-35.htm), you erroneously conclude that that is Zoning.
No, I didn't conclude it. The lawyers that looked into the effects of abolishing the planning board concluded it is a zoning ordinance. Both sides seem to agree with this. You are the only one I am aware of that is disputing it.
QuoteYou claim to have seen a "Zoning Ordinance" that was passed in Grafton in the 1970's. It is important for us to see that please.
If it is important to you to see it, do some fucking research. Stop making shit up. You are guessing.
QuoteDoes it, as you claim, prodice for the establishment of a Zoning Board of Adjustment? I bet you $100 it does not and is therefore NOT a Zoning Ordinance. Wanna bet? Huh? Bet me?
I never made that claim. How about we make a bet on something I claimed, or one that the things that you claim. But you seem to be chaning your claim. The law you site that requires the provision for the establishment of the ZBA was made
after the Grafton ordinance was passed.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/673/673-1.htm
Quote
673:1 Establishment of Local Land Use Boards. ?
IV. Every zoning ordinance adopted by a local legislative body shall include provisions for the establishment of a zoning board of adjustment
Source. 1983, 447:1. 1992, 64:5, eff. June 19, 1992.
So why don't you look into what the law was in 1976, and stop quoting today's law about adopting a zoning ordinance?
Quote
We agree that Grafton never established a Zoning Board. Therefore if they thought they passed a Zoning Ordinance in the 1970's, it has no legal effect.
Sure it does. The legal effect is that the ordinance would not go away as soon as the planning board is abolished.
again
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/673/673-19.htm
Quote
673:19 Effect of Abolishing Planning Boards. ? Upon the effective date of the abolition of a planning board, all land use control activities in the municipality formerly performed by the planning board shall cease. Existing zoning ordinances shall remain in effect following the abolition date for a period not to exceed 2 years from the date of such action, but no amendment to a zoning ordinance requiring action by the former planning board shall be permitted.
Are you saying the 2 acre min would go away as soon as the planning board is abolished?
Quote from: zackbass on January 02, 2006, 05:40 AM NHFT
You want every i dotted, okay, the Voters of Grafton never passed a Zoning Ordinance because they never passed an Ordinance that included provisions for the establishment of a zoning board of adjustment.
I just want the truth.
Quote from: zackbass on January 02, 2006, 05:40 AM NHFT
(#2 is written down for you in New Hampshire Law -
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXIV/673/673-1.htm)
But that was written after the Grafton ordinance was passed in 1976. Do you know what the law was in 1976?
Quote from: dead president on January 02, 2006, 12:29 PM NHFT
But that was written after the Grafton ordinance was passed in 1976. Do you know what the law was in 1976?
No, I don't. But I do know that several such Laws have been deemed to be invalid and utterly without legal force or effect because of that new Law, so if Grafton did pass a deficient Zoning Law in 1976 that would not be uncommon - several Towns have done that.
Quote from: dead president on January 02, 2006, 12:24 PM NHFT
Are you saying the 2 acre min would go away as soon as the planning board is abolished?
Yes, it definitely would, since no one would be legally required to pay the slightest mind to it. If you have a different meaning of "go away", such as "it is still in effect in some ineffable sense", then yes by the wording of the RSA it would still be "in effect" - but utterly ineffective and ineffectual and without legal effect of any kind.
Quote from: dead president on January 02, 2006, 12:24 PM NHFT
If it is important to you to see it, do some fucking research. Stop making shit up. You are guessing.
Sorry, I don't have access to the text of any 1976 Warrant Articles. Do you? If you do, then please spill the beans, we need to know. If you don't, then you are guessing as much as I am, and/or relying on your possible faulty memory.
You do sound like you are right, but how can we know YOU aren't making this shit up or in honest error? I provide Web links whenever possible, or quote from whatever documentation I have here. Please reciprocate.
Quote from: eukreign on January 01, 2006, 08:05 PM NHFT
But how can they if they disagree?
Oh, we will agree on something in the end, since your President is an honorable opponent (one I cherish far more than many who were my "friends"). Part of it is semantic, part of it may be faulty recollection, whatever, but it will be hammered out, although like making sausage it may not be pleasant to watch.
Quote from: zackbass on January 02, 2006, 01:01 PM NHFT
Quote from: dead president on January 02, 2006, 12:29 PM NHFT
But that was written after the Grafton ordinance was passed in 1976. Do you know what the law was in 1976?
No, I don't. But I do know that several such Laws have been deemed to be invalid and utterly without legal force or effect because of that new Law, so if Grafton did pass a deficient Zoning Law in 1976 that would not be uncommon - several Towns have done that.
Do you have any links to the court cases?
Quote from: zackbass on January 02, 2006, 01:04 PM NHFT
Quote from: dead president on January 02, 2006, 12:24 PM NHFT
Are you saying the 2 acre min would go away as soon as the planning board is abolished?
Yes, it definitely would, since no one would be legally required to pay the slightest mind to it. If you have a different meaning of "go away", such as "it is still in effect in some ineffable sense", then yes by the wording of the RSA it would still be "in effect" - but utterly ineffective and ineffectual and without legal effect of any kind.
As I understand it, whoever does the plat recording for the state would still enforce the 2 acre lot size min ordinance for 2 years after the planning board went away. It would be hard to subdivide without the plat of subdivision.
Quote from: zackbass on January 02, 2006, 01:10 PM NHFT
Quote from: dead president on January 02, 2006, 12:24 PM NHFT
If it is important to you to see it, do some fucking research. Stop making shit up. You are guessing.
Sorry, I don't have access to the text of any 1976 Warrant Articles. Do you?
You have just as much access as me. But I need to check on Tim's purchase anyway....
All I have is my faulty memory and bad notes.
The ordinance reads:
Henceforth, lot size for dwellings shall be a minimum of two acres.
Article 12, 1976 reads something like this:
To see if the town will vote for an ordinance for the minimum lot size of two acres....and I think it had the wording of the ordinance
Take note that the ordinace only applies to lots for dwellings....sound like land use to me.
If it is just an ordinance, and not a zoning ordinance, it does not go away if the planning board is abolished.
If it is a "deficient" zoning ordinance, it is still a zoning ordinance, and would go away within two years of the abolishment of the planning board.
Quote from: dead president on January 02, 2006, 06:51 PM NHFT
Do you have any links to the court cases?
http://www.deeringconnection.com/BackIssues/October-2002-insert.pdf
"Without a ZBA, a zoning ordinance would be invalid and could not be enforced.
As was said by Associate Justice Sherman Horton of the New Hampshire Supreme Court, dissenting in the
case of Grey Rocks Land Trust v. Town of Hebron, 136 N.H. 239, 246, 614 A.2d 1048, 1052 (1992) the
ZBA is the 'safety valve' of land use law, which allows 'waiver of the strict letter of the zoning
ordinance [in individual cases] without sacrifice to its spirit and purpose.'"
You can't petition for a Variance without a ZBA, and so you can't appeal the (non-existent) decision denying your request... NH considers that UnConstitutional:
http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2004/bacon005.htm
"This test, crafted with an eye towards Justice Horton?s dissent in Grey Rocks Land Trust v. Town of Hebron, 136 N.H. 239, 245-49 (1992) (Horton, J., dissenting), was designed to loosen the strictures which 'have made it essentially impossible for a [ZBA], honoring the letter of the law . . . to afford the relief appropriate to avoid an unconstitutional application of an otherwise valid general regulation.'"
Quote from: dead president on January 02, 2006, 07:19 PM NHFT
If it is just an ordinance, and not a zoning ordinance, it does not go away if the planning board is abolished.
I suspect it is NOT a Zoning Ordinance. Yes, Zoning covers both "Area" and "Use" restrictions, but as I have said, a Planning Board also has authority to restrict lot sizes AT THE TIME OF SUBDIVIDING.
But when the Planning Board is abolished, so is its authority to restrict lot sizes! Therefore any restriction created by that "Ordinance" would go away immediately.
Quote
If it is a "deficient" zoning ordinance, it is still a zoning ordinance, and would go away within two years of the abolishment of the planning board.
Such a "zoning ordinance would be invalid and and could not be enforced" (see Horton, above). Therefore it has "gone away" long ago; it was never enforceable.
Note that Grafton has no Capital Improvement Plan:
http://www.nhes.state.nh.us/elmi/htmlprofiles/pdfs/grafton.pdf
Now read http://www.strafford.org/legalupdate_2005.pdf:
"MDR is the developer of a fourteen lot subdivision and was originally issued five
building permits, but was later informed that under the growth control ordinance no
more permits could be issued for quite some time. MDR also sued the town, arguing
that the growth control ordinance was invalid because the town had never legally
adopted a capital improvement program (CIP), which is a prerequisite to the adoption of
a growth control ordinance under RSA 674:22. The trial court agreed that the town had
never validly adopted the growth control ordinance, and the supreme court had upheld
that ruling in an earlier case."
Note that, since in the case of Grafton a Zoning Ordinance is probably also UnConstitutional because of the lack of a Zoning Board of Adjustment (see Horton), you can probably even recover Damages in Court, since it then constitutues a Taking:
http://www.strafford.org/legalupdate_2005.pdf
"The court clarified some language in an earlier case by ruling that money
damages are only available to a plaintiff where the ordinance at issue is found to be
unconstitutional and constitutes a taking (temporary or permanent) of the plaintiff's
property. If the ordinance is merely invalid for some reason other than unconstitutionality,
and thus unenforceable, as was Fremont's growth control ordinance, the only
remedy the successful landowner is entitled to is an order forcing the town to issue the
building permits that were erroneously denied."
Quote from: dead president on January 02, 2006, 11:54 AM NHFT
Grafton has building notification. It was passed by popular vote in 1979, as article 14, and amended in 1988 with article 24.
A Notification of Constuction is reviewed and approved by the selectmen prior to commencment of such construction.
Big deal. Like Parental Notification. Tell them you're doing it and do it.
Does Article 14, or Article 24, say what happens if the SelectPersons decline to Approve the Notification? That sounds weird... Approve a Notification... what bull. You comply with the Notification requirement, you build, what can they do? There is no place to Petition for a Variance or to Appeal!
The State of New Hampshire
does now have a State-Wide Building Code, and it is within the power of the Town to create a Building Inspector and then require Building Permits... but they have not done so.
Note that, although there is a State-Wide Building Code, ALL administration and enforcement is LOCAL (BY STATUTE!), so if the local Town Government is unwilling or unable to properly administer or enforce the Code, you need not comply; the State cannot (BY STATUTE!) step in against you:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/155-A/155-A-2.htm
Quote
155-A:2 State Building Code. ?
....
IV. To the extent that it does not conflict with any other provision of law, the issuance of permits and the collection of fees pursuant to the state building code is expressly reserved for counties, towns, cities, and village districts.
....
X. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to permit or encourage the state to initiate or assume an independent role in the administration and enforcement of the New Hampshire building code for a building or structure that is not owned or operated by the state unless otherwise authorized by law.
Quote from: zackbass on January 03, 2006, 08:00 AM NHFT
Quote from: dead president on January 02, 2006, 06:51 PM NHFT
Do you have any links to the court cases?
http://www.deeringconnection.com/BackIssues/October-2002-insert.pdf
"Without a ZBA, a zoning ordinance would be invalid and could not be enforced.
As was said by Associate Justice Sherman Horton of the New Hampshire Supreme Court, dissenting in the
case of Grey Rocks Land Trust v. Town of Hebron, 136 N.H. 239, 246, 614 A.2d 1048, 1052 (1992) the
ZBA is the 'safety valve' of land use law, which allows 'waiver of the strict letter of the zoning
ordinance [in individual cases] without sacrifice to its spirit and purpose.'"
You can't petition for a Variance without a ZBA, and so you can't appeal the (non-existent) decision denying your request... NH considers that UnConstitutional:
http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2004/bacon005.htm
"This test, crafted with an eye towards Justice Horton?s dissent in Grey Rocks Land Trust v. Town of Hebron, 136 N.H. 239, 245-49 (1992) (Horton, J., dissenting), was designed to loosen the strictures which 'have made it essentially impossible for a [ZBA], honoring the letter of the law . . . to afford the relief appropriate to avoid an unconstitutional application of an otherwise valid general regulation.'"
How about a case that deals with a town that has a zoning ordinace but no ZBA. And a link to the decision please.
Quote from: zackbass on January 03, 2006, 08:12 AM NHFT
Such a "zoning ordinance would be invalid and and could not be enforced" (see Horton, above). Therefore it has "gone away" long ago; it was never enforceable.
Does the dissenting opinion in a case matter?
Sorry, but it is enforceable and has been enforced for the past 30 years. it is de facto legal untill it is struck down.
Maybe Tim can challange it by subdividing his 5.28 acres.
Quote from: dead president on January 03, 2006, 09:51 AM NHFT
Quote from: zackbass on January 03, 2006, 08:12 AM NHFT
Such a "zoning ordinance would be invalid and and could not be enforced" (see Horton, above). Therefore it has "gone away" long ago; it was never enforceable.
Does the dissenting opinion in a case matter?
Sorry, but it is enforceable and has been enforced for the past 30 years. it is de facto legal untill it is struck down.
Maybe Tim can challange it by subdividing his 5.28 acres.
No, the 2-acre lot size restriction IS enforceable - BY THE PLANNING BOARD - by not approving a SubDividing.
A ZONING ORDINANCE would be unenforceable; this pertains only to the Act of SubDividing, and therefore is not Zoning, it is only lot size restriction under the Planning Board.
Aside from that, there are STATE requirements, but that's not under discussion here... yet.
Quote from: dead president on January 03, 2006, 09:51 AM NHFT
Does the dissenting opinion in a case matter?
Yes, since it was quoted by the New Hampshire Supreme Court in the link I gave you.
Of course, it does NOT matter as far as the Decision, but it IS still "Good Law" even when it is "obiter dictum" - Supreme Court Justice Horton said that he understands that that is The Law, and no one disagreed with him - that was not what the Dissent was about. I am in good company, Horton says I am right, and another Supreme Court Decision quoted it favorably.
Quote from: dead president on January 03, 2006, 09:51 AM NHFT
Sorry, but it is enforceable and has been enforced for the past 30 years. it is de facto legal untill it is struck down.
That is not so. When you challenge it in Court, you make the argument that it is NOT enforceable and HAS NOT BEEN enforceable and is NOT Valid and HAS NOT BEEN Valid. Then the Court agrees with you and you get to do what you wanted.
Quote from: zackbass on January 03, 2006, 10:37 AM NHFT
Quote from: dead president on January 03, 2006, 09:51 AM NHFT
Does the dissenting opinion in a case matter?
Yes, since it was quoted by the New Hampshire Supreme Court in the link I gave you.
Of course, it does NOT matter as far as the Decision, but it IS still "Good Law" even when it is "obiter dictum" - Supreme Court Justice Horton said that he understands that that is The Law, and no one disagreed with him - that was not what the Dissent was about. I am in good company, Horton says I am right, and another Supreme Court Decision quoted it favorably.
Do you have the Supreme Court Decision for the case? I have only seen a quote.
Quote from: zackbass on January 03, 2006, 10:42 AM NHFT
Quote from: dead president on January 03, 2006, 09:51 AM NHFT
Sorry, but it is enforceable and has been enforced for the past 30 years. it is de facto legal untill it is struck down.
That is not so. When you challenge it in Court, you make the argument that it is NOT enforceable and HAS NOT BEEN enforceable and is NOT Valid and HAS NOT BEEN Valid. Then the Court agrees with you and you get to do what you wanted.
The fact is that it the ordinace is enforced today, it was yesterday, and will be enforced tomorrow. If it is enfoced, it is by definition enfoceable.
Quote from: zackbass on January 03, 2006, 10:32 AM NHFT
.... the 2-acre lot size restriction IS enforceable - BY THE PLANNING BOARD - by not approving a SubDividing.
As I said (right up there): That Ordinance IS enforceable. Because it is not a ZONING Ordinance.
If you see any Zoning Ordinances in Grafton, you may freely ignore them. If they TRY to enforce one against you, sue their ass and while you're at it sue them for your legal fees. That need only happen once... next time you sue them for Damages.
Quote from: dead president on January 03, 2006, 10:46 AM NHFT
Do you have the Supreme Court Decision for the case? I have only seen a quote.
Unfortunately, I don't have enough access to get the case itself, but I have come across several cases that
cite Horton's dicta favorably!
And I have this Court citation of a 1962 case, although again I haven't yet found the actual text of the case:
http://www.nh.gov/oep/programs/MRPA/conferences/documents/ZBAGettingOrganized.pdf
Quote
RSA 673:1 tells us that every zoning ordinance adopted by the local legislative
body (town meeting, or city or town council) shall include provisions for the
establishment of a zoning board of adjustment. The failure of a town to do this when
adopting a zoning ordinance renders the ordinance invalid. Town of Jaffrey v.
Heffernan, 104 N.H. 249 (1962). The zoning board of adjustment is thus an
essential "safety valve" in the whole process of regulating the use of land for the
public good.
And even the Official NH Zoning HandBook cites Jaffrey, and gives us a nice quote from it:
http://www.nh.gov/oep/resourcelibrary/referencelibrary/z/zoningboardofadjustment/documents/zbahandbook.doc
"The New Hampshire Supreme Court has stated '... the board of adjustment is an essential cog in the entire scheme of a zoning ordinance, and that lacking it, the ordinance before us is invalid as a zoning ordinance.' Jaffrey V. Heffernan l04 NH 249, (1962)."
Note that this predates any 1976 Ordinance!
Also please note that they don't say that such an Ordinance will BECOME Invalid if you take it to Court, they state that it IS ALREADY INVALID RIGHT NOW! The Town cannot legally enforce such an Ordinance.
Also see http://www.nh.gov/oep/programs/MRPA/conferences/documents/zbarolesresponsibilities.doc
I have a new theory. Zack Bass and el presidente are really the same person.
I don't want to know what they are doing behind the ignore button.
Quote from: zackbass on January 03, 2006, 03:02 PM NHFT
Note that this predates any 1976 Ordinance!
Also please note that they don't say that such an Ordinance will BECOME Invalid if you take it to Court, they state that it IS ALREADY INVALID RIGHT NOW! The Town cannot legally enforce such an Ordinance.
But you are saying it is not a zoning ordinance, so that would not apply.
I am saying it is a zoning ordinace. I am not making any claim as to whether it is valid or not. But it is enforced.
Quote from: zackbass on January 03, 2006, 10:32 AM NHFT
Quote from: dead president on January 03, 2006, 09:51 AM NHFT
Quote from: zackbass on January 03, 2006, 08:12 AM NHFT
Such a "zoning ordinance would be invalid and and could not be enforced" (see Horton, above). Therefore it has "gone away" long ago; it was never enforceable.
Does the dissenting opinion in a case matter?
Sorry, but it is enforceable and has been enforced for the past 30 years. it is de facto legal untill it is struck down.
Maybe Tim can challange it by subdividing his 5.28 acres.
No, the 2-acre lot size restriction IS enforceable - BY THE PLANNING BOARD - by not approving a SubDividing.
A ZONING ORDINANCE would be unenforceable; this pertains only to the Act of SubDividing, and therefore is not Zoning, it is only lot size restriction under the Planning Board.
It can also be enforced with the building notification crap.
It does not just pertain to the act of SubDividing. It resticts building a dwelling on a lot smaller than 2 acres. It resticts the USE of lots that are smaller than 2 acres. It does not limit the minimum lot size to 2 acres. It only does that if there is a dwelling on the lot. Or that is how it is written.
Quote from: president on January 04, 2006, 01:45 PM NHFT
Quote from: zackbass on January 03, 2006, 03:02 PM NHFT
Note that this predates any 1976 Ordinance!
Also please note that they don't say that such an Ordinance will BECOME Invalid if you take it to Court, they state that it IS ALREADY INVALID RIGHT NOW! The Town cannot legally enforce such an Ordinance.
But you are saying it is not a zoning ordinance, so that would not apply.
I am saying it is a zoning ordinace. I am not making any claim as to whether it is valid or not. But it is enforced.
As I said (right up there): That 2-acre Ordinance IS enforceable. Because it is not a ZONING Ordinance. The text of the 1976 Warrant Article never mentions the word ZONING.
If you see any Zoning Ordinances in Grafton, you may freely ignore them. If they TRY to enforce one against you, sue their ass and while you're at it sue them for your legal fees. That need only happen once... next time you sue them for Damages.
There is an unenforceable though uncontested 2 acre minimum for a dwelling in Grafton. I don't believe anything is said that limits you to one dwelling.
If you are thinking about cabins for real with no running water you just build. No permits.
You would probably be 'grandfathered'
The 'Planing Board' in Grafton has something to do with some 'Master Plan'. When you have land that you want to sub-divide, you have to go before the board pay them 100 bucks and bend over so they can crawl up your ass!
Your family can own the land for 200 years. All the town cared about was you paid your taxes. You decide to lop off five acres for your child. Suddenly, your entire property is under a microscope. They want a drawing for each member of the board. They want Contour marks. They want to know how the water flows. Where the driveways are. You pay for postage so the abbutters can be summoned to complain that they like things the way they are and don't want to see change.
After you comply and return to a meeting you usually find you missed something because they never told you you needed it. You can not get a list of what you need to comply. They want you to hire an engineer.
Fortunately we have two members of the board on the side of property owners. Unfortunately two other members are septic and civil engineering types who make a living going in front of other boards.
PLEASE! Move to Grafton and help us get rid of this Scourge!