Swansea ZBA denies Black Belt LLC leach‑field variance; drive‑through special‑exception continued

The Town of Swansea Zoning Board of Adjustment voted 5–0 to deny a variance requested by Black Belt LLC to locate an on‑site leach field inside the town’s 125‑foot wetland setback for a proposed commercial building at the Route 12/Marcy Hill Road corner.

Civil engineer Mark Bognery, representing the applicant, described a proposed 2,380‑square‑foot restaurant with two drive‑through windows, 15 parking spaces and an on‑site wastewater system that the applicant’s design team said would meet or exceed New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) requirements. Bognery told the board the team had sought to place the system in upland near the building to avoid any wetland filling or alteration and noted prior fill on the property dating to the 1980s.

Conservation commission members and several neighbors urged denial. The commission’s written comments stated that granting the variance would not be in the spirit of the town’s wetlands ordinance and that permitting a new leach field close to wetlands would not do “substantial justice” to the purpose of the setback. Residents raised long‑standing concerns about historic fill placed on the parcel in the 1980s, the proximity of seasonal groundwater to the surface, and potential downstream effects if stormwater or groundwater conditions change. One commenter, Amanda Gunseth, whose family owns property on Monadnock Highway, said stormwater flows and seasonal high groundwater had caused flooding issues in the past and asked how additional development would affect those flows.

The board discussed options to locate a system farther into upland on the parcel, but staff and the applicant said reaching a more distant location would have required a wetland crossing and additional disturbance. In deliberations, several board members cited the conservation commission’s formal recommendation and the technical uncertainty around historic fill and groundwater elevations when explaining their votes.

After the denial vote on the leach‑field variance, the board addressed related site‑plan items, including a separate special exception for a drive‑through lane. Because several planning‑level issues remained (traffic study follow‑up, DOT comments on a proposed egress, and outstanding conservation concerns) and because board membership available for decisions would be smaller at subsequent hearings, the applicant requested—and the board granted—a continuance of the related site‑plan/special‑exception items to a follow‑up meeting. The continuance was set for a special meeting the board scheduled for the next Monday to allow staff and the applicant to supply additional information. The denial of the wetland setback variance remains effective; the drive‑through special‑exception that would have depended on subsequent approvals was continued for further review.

“We met with conservation and planning staff and attempted to locate the system where it would not disturb wetlands,” engineer Mark Bognery said. “The location we proposed avoids wetland alteration and meets DES separation requirements in our design.” Conservation and neighbors countered that historic fill, a high water table in parts of the site and the town’s higher setback standard justify denial; the board voted to deny the variance.

The board’s denial is limited to the variance request for the leach field within the 125‑foot wetland setback. The applicant may revise the design and reapply, subject to town ordinance and state DES permitting.