Meeting report · Zoning Board of Adjustment
Creating this report cost real money.
Help fund coverage →
Zoning Board of Adjustment — May 19, 2026
The meeting was characterized by standard deliberative procedures, with all votes being unanimous and community input being directly addressed by the board.
Public impact
Issues from this meeting with documented community impact.
01
0-rosemary-lane-variance
Approval of reduced lot area and frontage requirements via subdivision variance. Affected: Local residents and future developers
zoning change
Decisions logged
Every recorded vote, with timestamps and dissents.
Approve variance for Zero Rosemary Lane, LLC regarding reduced frontage and lot area.
Approval is conditioned on receiving all required Planning Board approvals.
3-0 (Passed)
Approve variance for Robert Hovner at 33 Greenwood Road regarding setbacks.
Approved as presented.
3-0 (Passed)
Approve variance for Christopher Goodrich at 91 Christian Hill Road regarding shed setback.
Approval is conditioned on the shed not being closer to the street than the back line of the garage.
3-0 (Passed)
Combine variance criteria 1 and 2 into a single question.
Implementation to take effect 60 days from the meeting date (July 20, 2026).
3-0 (Passed)
Topics discussed
Click a topic to expand quotes and full context.
▶ 00:25 Board Vacancy and Continuances
The Board announced a recent resignation and called for volunteers. Several agenda items (BRAF case, Tanna Properties, and the Zoll case) were continued to the June 16th meeting.
Speakers: Unidentified speaker
▶ 03:36 Rosemary Lane Variance Request
Deliberation regarding a variance for Zero Rosemary Lane, LLC to allow for reduced frontage lots and reduced lot area based on pre-existing non-conforming conditions.
Speakers: Unidentified speaker
▶ 14:06 Robert Hovner Variance Request
Discussion of a request for relief from setback requirements to allow for the construction of a single-family home on Baboosic Lake.
Speakers: Unidentified speaker
▶ 53:00 Christopher Goodrich Variance Request
A request to place a 10x16 foot storage shed 50 feet from the street, seeking relief from the 100-foot setback requirement on a historic property.
Speakers: Unidentified speaker
▶ 73:10 Approval of Minutes
The board reviewed and voted on the minutes from April 21st and February 17th, 2026.
Speakers: Unidentified speaker
▶ 76:10 Procedural Change to Variance Criteria
The board discussed and voted to combine the first two criteria of the variance test into a single question to streamline proceedings.
Speakers: Unidentified speaker
Controversy & dissent
Where the board, the community, or the agenda diverged.
Potentially controversial issues
01
Rosemary Lane Variance Request
The request involves a subdivision variance for reduced frontage and lot area. While it was approved, the discussion regarding the expiration of vested rights (noted by a speaker) suggests potential complexity regarding land use legality and pre-existing conditions.
Board position: Approved the variance, conditioned on Planning Board approvals.
low concern
02
Robert Hovner Variance Request
Involves setbacks for a single-family home on Baboosic Lake, which often triggers environmental and neighbor concerns regarding lake access and property density.
Board position: Approved the variance as presented after detailed deliberation on septic and neighbor impact.
medium concern
03
Christopher Goodrich Variance Request
Relates to a 100-foot scenic road setback on a historic property. Residents or preservationists often view scenic setback relaxations as a threat to the town's aesthetic character.
Board position: Approved the variance with a specific condition regarding the shed's placement relative to the garage to mitigate visual impact.
medium concern
Community vs. board tension
Ready to share? AI-written accountability posts about this meeting's controversies.
View posts →
Action items
Who owes what, by when.
Post notice of board vacancy on social media and signage.
Assigned: Community Development Office
Rework application packages to reflect the combined variance criteria.
Assigned: Community Development Office · Due: July 20, 2026
Notable statements
They had it vested for four years... and it's 20 years now. So that has expired. — Unidentified speaker · Regarding the Rosemary Lane case and the age of the existing lot approval. ▶ 06:48
My home is almost 250 years old and sits just 20 feet from the street. — Unidentified speaker · Explaining the unique hardship regarding the 100-foot scenic setback for the Goodrich case. ▶ 55:10
Public comment
What residents said — verbatim, with timestamps.
2
Total speakers
2
Addressed
0
Partial
0
Not addressed
Earl Sanford
Addressed
Presented a variance request for Robert Hovner at 33 Greenwood Road regarding setback distances for a new single-family home. He explained that the project has undergone extensive review by the DES, Wetland Board, and Conservation Commission and involves moving the structure further from the lake to improve environmental outcomes.
Key concern
Request for relief from front and side building setbacks to allow for a more environmentally friendly house placement.
Board responseThe board engaged in a detailed discussion regarding the septic system location, the history of the property lots, and the impact on neighbors. They ultimately granted the variance without specific conditions.
The board thoroughly questioned the applicant on all five variance criteria, the septic layout, and neighbor concerns before voting to approve.
Christopher Goodrich
Addressed
Requested a variance to place a 10x16 foot storage shed 50 feet from the street instead of the required 100 feet at 91 Christian Hill Road. He noted that his historic home is already situated very close to the road and that the shed would be screened by the house.
Key concern
Relief from the 100-foot scenic road setback to allow for practical placement of a storage shed.
Board responseThe board asked questions regarding the shed's location relative to the garage, septic system, and visibility. They approved the variance with a condition that the shed does not extend closer to the street than the back of the garage.
The board addressed the hardship and technical details of the placement and provided a specific condition to ensure the setback intent was met.
Support coverage
Creating this report cost real money.
MeetingWatch attended, transcribed, and analyzed this meeting on its own dime. If this work is valuable to you, chip in to keep covering Amherst.
Follow Amherst
One email when a new report is published from the Zoning Board of Adjustment — or one weekly digest.
Report composed by
grok-4.3, gemma-4-26b, grok-4.20-0309-reasoning · analyzed 2026-05-30.