Permit to build in Grafton?

[president]

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.

[zackbass]

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.

[zackbass]

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.

[zackbass]

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.

[president]

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.

[president]

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.

[zackbass]

  .... 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.

[zackbass]

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

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

[Kat Kanning]

I have a new theory.  Zack Bass and el presidente are really the same person.

[Russell Kanning]

I don't want to know what they are doing behind the ignore button.

[president]

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.

[president]

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.

[zackbass]

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.

[Lloyd Danforth]

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.

[Lloyd Danforth]

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!