The Zoning Board of Appeals heard an application to build a single‑family home at 43 Pitcherville Road that seeks relief from the town’s frontage requirement (200 feet) to a proposed frontage of roughly 100 feet.
Applicant Daryl Gagne explained he had attempted since July 2024 to purchase a small strip of land in front of the lot but the owner would not sell; he said he completed a well, septic design and driveway work while attempting to secure additional frontage and submitted for a building permit and then a variance after receiving a denial.
Attorney Christine Tree, appearing for abutter Gilbert Nevin, outlined the legal standards for variances: the board must find a site‑specific circumstance (soil, shape, topography or existing structure) that creates a substantial hardship, and the relief must not derogate from the purposes of the ordinance. She told the board that insufficient frontage by itself generally does not support a variance, said sunk costs typically do not create statutory hardship, and noted the lot was created by an ANR plan in 1998 and likely was not grandfathered to conform to the current frontage standard.
Board members discussed alternatives (purchasing nearby parcels), town record issues for an unknown‑owner remnant parcel, and the assessor’s role in tracking unassigned lots. After questions and deliberation, the board closed the public hearing and asked planner Alec to draft the formal determination reflecting members' leanings — several members stated they were leaning toward denying the variance — and reconvene next week to review and vote on the drafted language.
Representative quotes from the hearing include the attorney explaining variance standards and describing why the lot’s circumstances may not meet the statutory hardship test.