albee order to dismiss

8/3/2019 Albee Order to Dismiss

1/6

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ,_:#try' : : r - - l r s t . C r N o r c n e : n l a : r , - IP . O . B o x 9 4 Ar r - t n . : r \ . \ j { 0 3 4 _ av - r Y v s ] / /6 0 3 3 5 6 - f l L A

T : . : F - a i - : d a t l F . - ' o - p r , E s q .J = : L - j , - - : L j ' l' - . = d : . 1 ' - : Y . t ; l l - r - T - F l _ r n . l ZN o r t h C o n w a ' v ' , N H C : A 6 a 5 2 r 0

R E T o w n o f B a : : L l e t t v . E d F u r l o n g d / b / a L r f ' M a n S n o w m o b r l eD o c i : e t l r J o . 0 9 - C \ ' - 0 0 0 0 3

E n : - o s - - i p 1 e . , L s e r n d J u d q e A l b e e ' s o r d e r - c n t h e M o t r o n t o D r s m l s s .

f r t s a! a L c C ] e r k o f C o u r t

J C : T c w n c f B a r t l e t iE i F r i : , c n c

I I - C V : ' C l _ - I - a T

A O CF o r m C T P 1 0 0 R e v 1 2 / ? 2 / 1 9 9 9 )


2/6

TheState f NewHampshireCarroll, s DistrictCourtNorthern arrollCounty

No.09-CV-003LANDUSECtTATtON)lN THE MATTEROF:TOWNOF BARTLETTV. EDWARDFURLONG ll

ORDERONMOTION O DISMISSThe Townof Bartlett ascommenced LandUseCitation gainstEdward

Furlong,l l relativeoworkcarried ut by himon propertyn the own.Thedefendantmoves o dismiss laiminghe own'sZoningOrdinancesunconstitutionals being agueandsubject o arbitrary nforcement.

The Townallegeshat"renovationnd construction orkcontinued n thecabinson the property . . without irstobtaining building ermit venafterbeingnotifiedhatsuchpermitwas required nder he Townof Bartlett oningOrdinance rticleXVll-BAdministration,nforcementndpenalties hichrequires building ermitor nternal ndexternalmodificationsf twillchangetheassessed alue." he referenced rovision f the ordinanceeads n pertinentpart: Any person,irmor corporation1) ntendingo moveor anyway re-locatea building,railer,mobile omeor otherstructure r (2) ntendingo build,construct, r modify internally r externally) ny structure r taxable ropertyntheTownof Baftlett internalmodificationsil l equire building ermit ndusepermitunless uchmodificationsil l notchange he egally ssessed alueof astructure r wil lnot result n increased aily lowof septage .9.,addingbathroom, edroom,ireplace, tc.)or (3) ntendingo changea parcel f landorbuildingromone category f use, ncluding nused and, o another se . ."

FEeEl\fF*n ljs1 g 2'1'"8


3/6

The ordinance oeson to require permit o be submittedo the BoardofSelectmen. fter eview,he Boardshalleithergrantor deny he issuance f aBuilding nd UsePermit.f it denies hepermit, heordinanceequireshe Boardto state n writinghe reasonsor heiraction.TheTownalsohasa formentiiled"NOTIFICATIONFORMORMINORHANGESOpROpERTy".TheZoningOrdinanceas enterednevidence s Respondent's makesno referenceo sucha formanddoesnotappear o mandatehat he orm be completed ndsubmitted. heformappearso be a seif-repor ling echanismor he property wner o acivisethe axingofficials f anychanges o hispropertywhich n theproperty wner'sopinion o not equire building ermit ut maychange heassessed alue.Theform nstructs hen t shouldbe usedas follows. This orm s o be used ornotif icationurposeso the Assessor's ff iceof minorchangeso property hichdo not require building ermitbut maychange he assessed alue.someexamples ouldbe a change n the ypeof sidingon the house, eplacing roof,change n typeof flooring, hange n ypeof heating ystem, r change ninsulation."heplainmeaning f this anguages that he Town equiresnotificationo theassessors f certainmodificationshichdo not requireabuildlng permitbutmay change he assessedvalue.Thus,accordingo theassessors theselectmen), property wnerdoesnotneeda building ermitochange he siding n a structure,eplace roof,change he looring, eatingsystem, r insulation.t the same ime, heZoningOrdinanceequires buildingpermit f a propefty wner s going o modify nystructure,nternallyorexternally, heonlyexception eing nternalmodificationshich will not


4/6

change he legallyassessedvalue of a structure or increase aily eptageflow.At best, hese wo provisions reconfusing ndcontradictory.t theirworst,they equire property wner o carryout an assessmentunction,hat s, heproperty wnermustdeterminen one nstancewhether he changes minoranddoesnot equire bui lding ermit utmay changehis assessed alue,and, nthe other nstanceor nternal hanges nly, hat he modificati onil l notchange he assessedvalue.

When he court s cailedupon o construe he ermsof an ordinance.heTermswillnotbe deemed oid orvagueness s longas the ranguageadequatelypprises ne of the standardso be used ndetermininghetherbuilding ermit s required r not.The ermsof an ordinancemustbe ramedwithsufficientlarity nd n a definite ndcertainmanner o thatan average erson,after eadingt,wil lunderstand henhe is violatingtsprovisions.f theordinance efineshe erms, ssues, r standard,he definition illgovern.Whennodefinit ions providedn the ordinance,he ordinance s a wholewillbeexaminedn an attempto determinehe meaning, r themeaningwillbedeterminednaccordance ith he aw,statutes, r with he ntent f themunicipal ody hatenacted t,and any ambiguity ouldbe resolved yreferenceo the apparentobjective f the provision.Sformsv. Eaton,131 N.H.50. Althoughhe courtwas notprovidedhe full extof the ZoningOrdinance,fthe methodordetermining hether particularmodification ouldor wouldnotaffect heproperty's ssessed alueweredetailedn the ordinance, resumablycounsel or the Town wouldhaveprovidedt to the court.Lookingo the issueof


5/6

the Town's ntent n uti l izinghe anguage f ArticleXVll,B, collateral vidence ftheTown's ntent an be found n he orm requiredo be iledwith he assessorswherein xamples regivenof instances hichdo notrequire building ermit,but mayhavean impact n assessed alue.Thoseexamples,n part,contradicttheZoningOrdinance,reating n ambiguity

TheTown's equirementhat heproperty wnerapply hestandard fwhether he assessed alueof hispropertywillbe changed laces he propertyowner n the position f havingo knowhow assessed aluations redeterminedandwhatwilland will not havea bearing n the axable alueof property.WhiletheTowncontends SA75:1should aveaidedMr.Furlongn making isdetermination,he assessment rocesss complicated,nd hedeterminationfwhatmethodshouldbe used n appraising particular ropertys best eft o theassessor esponsibleor valuingheproperty.l hecourt inds his ask s beyondthe kenof theaverage roperty wner.The ordinance ivesno guidance n howto make he determinationnd heTown'sown ormsare nconsistentith heordinance. he motion o di smiss sgranted.

While he ordinance s writtenmay not comportwithstatutoryrequirennentss the zoning nabling ct hasbeen nterpretedy thecourts,hecourtsuggestshe Townand Mr. Furlong etermine hatconstitutesormalupkeep nd maintenance f hisproperty r fallswithin hepararnetersf thecategory f "minor hangeso property." heTownneeds o specificallyite

Propertymustbe appraised t its ulland ruevalue n moneyas thesamewouldbe appraisedin payment f a just debt due roma solvent ebtor,whetherutilizinghe replacementos tapproach, omparable alesmethod, r capitalizationf income pproach. enerally, fteramethod s selected,he appraiserhe napplies he methodandadiusts asedon various actorsuniqueo thepropertyn quest ion.


6/6

thosepartsof thisproject hich alloutside f the realmof normalmaintenance.lf the property wnerexceeded isright o maintain ispropefty, r to makeminorchanges uchas areenumerated n the notif icationorm, hatdoesnotmean he wholeprojects contaminatedy these nfractions,f theyexist.

Forhispart, heproperty wnerneeds o submitmore hana rudimentarysketchon the backsideof a document nd mustmakea reasonable ffort osupply he informationromwhicha reasoned eterminationanbe madewhetherhe requires building ermitor any portion f the workdone.While t isnot he court's ole o advise,t posits hissuggestionn thehopes hepartieswillbe able o achieve resolution ithout urther itiqation.

August 7,2009\ \ c \ o ^\ Z--Z)r,MtA-

PamelaD. Albee, ust ice

cc: Town of Bart le t tRanda l l _ F" Coope r , Esq .Doug las Mans f i e l d , Esq .Edward FurlongC le rk ' s No t i ce z B/ I7 /09

6

albee order to dismiss

Documents