Litchfield board approves variance to preserve reduced building envelope at 349 Charles Bankraftoft Highway

LITCHFIELD — The Litchfield Zoning Board of Adjustment voted 4–0 on June 15 to grant a variance that lets the owners of 349 Charles Bankraftoft Highway keep a reduced building envelope for an existing duplex.

Doug Maguire of the Dubet Group, representing owners Mark and Sandy Martell, told the board the parcel is about 8.9 acres but is bisected by a jurisdictional drainage ditch and a PSNH utility easement that reduce the developable area around the duplex. He said the ordinance’s minimum building envelope requirement is 34,848 square feet but the existing duplex sits within about 13,085 square feet of buildable area. "The property is bisected by an existing wetland ditch and existing PSNH utility easement which limits the building envelope," Maguire said, noting the duplex was built in 1998 and predates the 2007 zoning change.

The board reviewed the five variance criteria on the record — public interest, spirit of the ordinance, substantial justice, effect on property values, and hardship — and concluded the applicant met each. In findings on the record members emphasized the duplex’s pre‑existing location, the site constraints created by the easement and drainage ditch, and that the two new single‑family lots proposed by the subdivision otherwise conform to zoning standards. A motion to grant the variance cited section 502.01 (minimum building envelope area) and was seconded; the board announced the request was granted by the four members present.

Board members questioned project details including driveway access and safety. Maguire said the owners control adjacent parcels and are proposing a shared driveway easement (shown as a 20‑foot easement with a likely 14‑foot travelway), partly to avoid constructing an additional long access drive. Final driveway alignment, surfacing and sight‑distance requirements will be reviewed by the planning board when the subdivision application is filed.

Chair opened the public input period; no members of the public spoke in favor or opposition. The board noted that, notwithstanding tonight’s variance, the subdivision and easement configuration must still be approved by the planning board before any new lots are developed.

After the vote the board introduced a new building inspector (name not given in the record). The inspector said he had experience in construction and would attend meetings as needed. The board also discussed updating the application packet to require multiple paper plan sets and deferred approval of prior meeting minutes to its next meeting. The meeting adjourned at about 7:26 p.m.