NHCaseLaw.com

Petitioners, Suzanne and Todd Adamcryck, bring this pro se appeal of the decision of the City of Concord Zoning Board of Adjustment ("ZBA" or "the Board") granting variance requests by the intervenor, Laconia Savings Bank ("LSB"). The City and LSB object to the relief requested by the petitioners. After hearing and upon consideration of the parties' oral and written arguments, the record, and applicable law, the Court finds and rules as follows.

GALWAY, J. The plaintiff, Nine A, LLC, challenges a Superior Court (Sullivan, J.) order affirming decisions of the Chesterfield Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) denying variance applications for development of a parcel of land bordering Spofford Lake in Chesterfield. On appeal the plaintiff argues that the superior court erred in finding that the requested variances violated the spirit of Chesterfield’s zoning ordinance and were contrary to the public interest and that the superior court erred in not finding that the plaintiff satisfied the remaining variance requirements. We affirm.

BRODERICK, C.J. This case comes before us on an interlocutory appeal without ruling, see Sup. Ct. R. 9, from the Superior Court (Groff, J.). It poses two questions: (1) Does RSA 231:28 require a petitioner requesting permission from the Selectmen to upgrade and reclassify an existing Class VI road to Class V standards to show occasion exists for the layout? (2) If the Court finds that the occasion analysis applies to the upgrade and reclassification under RSA 231:28, may the Selectmen consider as part of the occasion analysis the anticipated impact associated with the development that may result from the upgrade of the Class VI road to Class V status?

The petitioners, Gail Page, Francine Philippe, and Douglas Ponusky, appeal the decision of the City of Concord Zoning Board of Adjustment (the “ZBA”) granting the intervenor, Whispering Heights, LLC’s, request for a variance from certain requirements of the City of Concord Zoning Ordinance (the “ordinance”). The Court held a hearing on the petitioners’ appeal. Upon review of the parties’ arguments, the pleadings, and the applicable law, the Court finds and rules as follows.