The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Avon held a meeting on Thursday, June 23, 2011 at the Avon Town Hall. Present were Messrs. Drew, Eschert, Johansen, McNeill, Ms. Hard and Mr. McCahill, Planning & Community Development Specialist. Mr. Drew called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING June 23, 2011
The Clerk read the call to meeting.
Mr. Drew read the Application of John W. Boullie, owner/applicant; requesting from the Avon Zoning Regulations, Section IV.A.6. a 25’ variance from the 30’ rear yard setback requirement, a 19’ variance from the 25’ side yard setback requirement to permit existing shed to remain, a 21’ variance from the 25’ side yard setback requirement to permit an existing playhouse to remain, located at 101 Old Mill Road in an R-40 zone.
Mr. John Boullie was present. He presented several photographs of his existing property. He thanked the Board for being here tonight and stated he knows some of them as he has served on the Fire Department Board of Directors and on the Volunteer Fire Department. He apologized that the outbuildings are actually placed on his property. He was made aware of the permit and the setback requirements when Mr. McCahill visited his property on another matter. He is requesting two variances tonight. The garden shed in the back is in the corner and has been in place for about two years; the play house in the front side of the property had been there for about nine months.
Regarding the play house, when he wrote the application he figured the worst case scenario in terms of the setbacks. The property has been surveyed with stakes in place. The shed is 11’ from the side yard so he would only need a 14’ variance instead of the requested 21’. The play house is 8’x12’ equals 96 sq.ft. from Kloter Farms; the garden shed is 12’x16’ equals 192 sq.ft. from Reeds Ferry, both structures are cedar and stained to match the color of the house and trim.
The grade of the property doesn’t lend itself for many other choices where they can go. In regards to the play house he is willing to plant evergreens or install a privacy fence to shield the view of it if necessary. As another option he showed a picture of where the play house could go to meet the requirements. It would move the play house 6’ over and up 14’. There is a rock outcropping there which would mean raising the shed two feet above the rock to make it level. He described the pictures with trees shielding the shed.
Mr. David J. Wayland, 97 Old Mill Road said he is adjacent to Mr. Boullie’s property on the side where the play house is located. There are many other places in his front yard where he could place this play house other than just moving it a few feet either way. The land is quite flat. He presented a map showing his house which is placed sideways on the lot so he looks directly at the Boullie’s front yard. He thinks it’s the only yard in town with a shed in the front yard. When he found out the play house was in violation, he asked Mr. Boullie to put it in compliance and thought he had agreed to do so. He said Mr. Boullie was going to put in a fence and the fence company would move the building for him for nothing. Mr. Wayland said he would prefer not to have a fence there. He considers it an eyesore, it’s right in his eye shot, it sits right on the border of the property, he has no shrubs on his property obstructing it, all the shrubs are on Mr. Wayland’s property which he
has been planting there since the play house was put there. Why is he even asking for a variance, there are many places he could put it in his yard other then that side, certainly there is no hardship at all.
Mr. Bouille said if he put up a 6’ fence and moved the shed to comply with regulations, the neighbor would be able to see it. To move the shed to where the rock outcropping is he would have to raise the shed. His children are ages 3,5,6 and 9 and they would have to climb 2’ up to the shed.
Mr. Drew said the variance request is for 21’ from the 25’ side yard indicating it is about 4’ from the property line.
Mr. McCahill stated originally he requested a conservative amount and then checked and is now asking for a revision for less. He does not know of other sheds located in the front yard. We have also not received any complaints regarding this shed.
Mr. Bouille said he didn’t realize when he filled out the application that it would ask for a specific distance. Afterward he measured the distance and thinks it is 11’ from the property line. When his children get older he will probably remove it.
Mr. Eschert asked if he could move the play house further away from the rock? Mr. Bouille replied he could move the house with the porch over the rock.
Mr. Drew stated the only correspondence was from Mr. Wayland who has already spoken so he would not read the letter.
There was no one else present. The Public Hearing closed at 7:53 p.m.
Mr. Drew read the Application of Moira Chubb owner, Barry Chubb applicant; requesting from the Avon Zoning Regulations, Sections III.C. & IV.A.2., a 341 sq.ft. variance from the 1,000 sq.ft. allowed for outbuildings to permit a 728 sq.ft. addition to an existing 612 sq.ft. nonconforming outbuilding; and a variance to use the addition as a workshop, located at 36 Sylvan Street in an R-30 zone.
Mr. Chris Hill was present representing Mr. Barry Chubb. He showed pictures of proposed addition. It will be built to compliment the house to upgrade the whole property. He will use it as a hobby workshop and store crafts. The present garage is nonconforming. The addition would be within the zoning regulations.
Mr. McCahill explained he talked to Mr. Chubb about changing the size of the addition and detaching the building so he would not need a variance. Mr. Chubb said he did not want a smaller size. He then read the memo from Eleanor Mazur, 36 Sylvan Street with no objections to this variance.
There was no one else present. The Public Hearing closed at 8:00 p.m.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING June 23, 2011
A Zoning Board of Appeals meeting was held following the Public Hearing.
Mr. Drew said he would reverse the order of the agenda tonight.
Mr. Eschert made a motion to GRANT, seconded by Ms. Hard, the Application of Moira Chubb owner, Barry Chubb applicant; requesting from the Avon Zoning Regulations, Sections III.C. & IV.A.2., a 341 sq.ft. variance from the 1,000 sq.ft. allowed for outbuildings to permit a 728 sq.ft. addition to an existing 612 sq.ft. nonconforming outbuilding; and a variance to use the addition as a workshop, located at 36 Sylvan Street in an R-30 zone. The vote was unanimous by Messrs Drew, Eschert, Johansen, McNeill and Ms. Hard.
Reason – Granting the variance is in harmony and keeping with the purpose and intent of the regulations and would not be injurious to the neighborhood and a neighbor said she was in favor of the application.
Hardship – Denying would deprive the owner of a reasonable use of the property.
Application of John W. Boullie, owner/applicant; requesting from the Avon Zoning Regulations, Section IV.A.6. a 25’ variance from the 30’ rear yard setback requirement, a 19’ variance from the 25’ side yard setback requirement to permit existing shed to remain; a 21’ variance from the 25’ side yard setback requirement to permit an existing playhouse to remain, located at 101 Old Mill Road in an R-40 zone. Discussion followed.
Mr. Eschert made a motion to GRANT the garden shed, seconded by Ms. Hard. The vote was unanimous by Messrs. Drew, Eschert, Johansen, McNeill & Ms. Hard.
Reason – To grant variance is in harmony and keeping with the purpose and intent of the regulations and would not be injurious to the neighborhood.
Hardship – To deny would deprive the owner of a reasonable use of the property.
Mr. Drew said because there was no further motion it is apparent we are not happy with the play house being there and a neighbor objecting. A variance is a right and not a privilege and a neighbor is objecting to something in the yard and somebody didn’t do his homework. If putting up a structure you should check with the town and ask if where it’s to be placed is appropriate as we have rules and regulations. What you could do is withdraw this part of the application. We’re not going to approve this application. This variance is a high magnitude, high percentage and that concerns us. By withdrawing it they could submit a different variance request and our advice is you accommodate your neighbor so that you both agree this is appropriate.
Mr. McCahill said he could withdraw this variance and resubmit a different variance, just not this same request.
Mr. Boullie stated he would withdraw the application for the play shed.
Mr. Eschert made a motion to approve the meeting dates for the calendar for 2012, seconded by Ms. Hard. The vote was unanimous by Messrs Drew, Eschert, Johansen, McNeill and Ms. Hard.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Shirley C. Kucia, Clerk
| 
