BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES
Monday, January 26, 2009
7:00 p.m.
Present: Vice-Chairman Gregory Neffinger, Secretary Christine Kumiega-Provost and Alternate Chet Zymroz
Absent: Chairman Lisa Beauvais and Alternate Jim Bodurtha
The Vice-Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
1. Acceptance of Minutes
Ms. Kumiega moved to approve the minutes of December 22, 2008; Mr. Neffinger second. Two in favor; Mr. Zymroz abstaining.
Mr. Zymroz moved to approve the minutes of October 27, 2008; Mr. Neffinger second. Two in favor; Ms. Kumiega abstaining.
2. Election of Officers
Mr. Neffinger moved to table the election of officers until the next meeting of the Board when all members are in attendance.
3. Public Hearings
7:00 p.m. (7:03 p.m.)- David and Elizabeth Amato (Variance) – Variance from Section 9.034 of the Zoning Ordinance that requires access driveways shall be located no closer than thirty-feet from one another for the property located at 85 Therese Marie Drive.
Attorney Sypek, representing the applicant, said they are requesting a variance from Section 9.034 of the Zoning Ordinance regarding the driveway separation rule. The location in question is 85 Therese Marie Drive, which is part of a subdivision at the end of Morgan Road. This subdivision consists of 13 lots built on a hill with a cul-de-sac. The lots affected are the last lots on the top of the hill. The subdivision was approved and the applicant built a home at 70 Therese Marie but now owns this lot, which is difficult to work with due to an easement from AT&T and the location of the water tower. Lot #7 was sold in 2005 has their driveway 4 feet from the pin and this lot is on the corner of the east side. All the driveways have been constructed and now there
is not enough room to meet the 30-foot separation rule. There are two problems: 1. The tightness of the radius of the cul-de-sac makes it difficult to fit all the driveways in and, 2. Having to deal with the hardships on this lot meet the rule for granting a variance. This is the only place he was able to place his driveway. Mr. Amato is still finishing the subdivision because he is not done with cutting the soils to put the sidewalks in. The topography is steep and sharply graded, as well as an oddly shaped lot. The soils are an issue with the drainage and landscaping.
Mr. Neffinger asked if all the driveways were built when he built his home? Attorney Sypek said the home was built in 2008. Mr. Neffinger asked how far the driveway was from Lot #7. Attorney Sypek said it is 14 feet total.
The Board reviewed the topographical subdivision plan. Mr. Neffinger asked for questions from the Board.
Ms. Kumiega asked what happened with Lot # 7? Attorney Sypek said Lot #7 was bought and built first. The owner did not see the proposed plan of driveway layouts that was approved by the Planning Board. Mr. Werbiskis said no access permit was applied for, if that had been done this issue would have been picked up.
Mr. Neffinger asked for comments from the audience. No comments followed.
Mr. Neffinger moved to close the public hearing; Ms. Kumiega second. UAV.
Mr. Neffinger said he felt the hardship could be met with the topography of the lot and the AT&T easement. Lot 6 put their driveway were they were supposed to, but Lot 7 did not. Mr. Neffinger said he felt inclined to grant the variance.
Ms. Kumiega agreed, but said she does not like to see the variances after construction has already been done.
Mr. Zymroz said he agrees with the variance and if the driveway had not been built according to the plan then he may not agree.
Mr. Neffinger moved to grant the variance for the driveway at 95 Therese Marie Drive and finding that a variance could be granted due to conditions relating to the parcel with the AT&T easement and the topography of the lot and that there is a substantial hardship because the driveway was built according to the plan approved by the Planning Board for this subdivision; Ms. Kumiega second. UAV.
Mr. Werbiskis noted the Council is reviewing a proposed driveway ordinance that would require 15-foot separation from the property lines for all new lots.
3. New/Old Business
The Board reviewed and discussed the proposed changes to the state zoning act (LUPA). Mr. Werbiskis said that it is his opinion that the proposed changes are more of a benefit to the developer and not the local community. The state would place a mandate on the minimum number of new housing units to be constructed per year to reap the benefits of the proposed legislation. West Springfield is relatively built out, as well as other communities, and reaching the goal is not realistic.
4. Date of Next Meeting
The next regular meeting of the Board will be held on Monday, February 23, 2009, at 7:00 p.m.
5. Adjournment
Mr. Neffinger moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:30 p.m.; Ms. Kumiega second. The vote was unanimous.
__________________________________
Christine Kumiega Provost
Secretary, Board of Appeals
| 
