MONSON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
DECEMBER 20, 2007
MEMBERS PRESENT: William Donovan, Frank Carey, David Beaudoin, Tere Hrynkiw, Nicola Gioscia, Roger Pelletier, Kevin Biermann and David Jarvis.
Chairman William Donovan convened the meeting at 7:30 P.M.
David Beaudoin moved to accept the minutes of November 29, 2007 as presented.
Frank Carey seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
The Board received a request from Equestrian Hills Estates LLC to continue the public hearing for earth removal to January 24, 2008 at 7:45 P.M. as they have retained the services of Fuss & O’Neil to perform a traffic study and it would not be ready for the meeting in December.
David Jarvis moved to approve the request for a continuance in order for the applicant to have a traffic study completed.
Frank Carey seconded the motion.
It was so voted by majority vote.
Voting aye: William Donovan, Frank Carey, David Jarvis and Kevin Biermann.
Voting nay: David Beaudoin.
8:15 Public Hearing for Timothy Hardick & Rebecca Siok for a Variance from the required 50-foot rear setback for construction of a single family home on Lot 1 Hovey Road. Case G – 2007.
Members voting: William Donovan, David Beaudoin, Frank Carey, Tere Hrynkiw and Nicola Gioscia.
Following comments from the Chairman regarding the powers and purpose of the Zoning Board of Appeals, the time constraints which the Board must follow to schedule a hearing and render a decision, the manner in which the hearing would be conducted, introduction of the Board members and reading of the Legal Notice as it appeared in the Republican newspaper the weeks of December 5, & 12, 2007 Mr. Hardick made a presentation to the Board.
Mr. Hardick stated that he and his wife purchased the property on Hovey Road about 3-years ago and had thought by this time the house would have been built and occupied. The design process has proved to be very difficult due to the shape of the lot. It has been a long process to find a design to suit the land and the surrounding neighborhood. After going through a couple of architectural firms it was decided to approach the owners of abutting land to the rear of the property to buy land and avoid having to go for a variance. The property to the rear is owned by Bruce & Mary O’Brien but they were not interested in selling any land. In addition to the odd shape the abutting rear land inclines steeply and has cell towers on the property. As it became clearer that a variance was
unavoidable another percolation test was performed to move the septic system from the rear of the property to the front so that a variance would be requested from the rear setback line rather than the front setback line. Given that the land in the rear has a sharp incline and cell towers it is unlikely it will be developed for residential use and a variance from the rear setback would not affect existing homes.
William Donovan and Frank Carey stated they had driven past the property. Mr. Carey stated the day he was there Connecticut Valley was on the property drilling a well.
No one was present to support the petition and no one was present to oppose granting a variance.
The Board did not receive any correspondence from any Town Board of Department.
David Beaudoin questioned if the house could be turned or moved forward a little to fit on the lot without a variance?
Mr. Hardick stated they tried several different designs and different architects in an attempt to avoid a variance.
William Donovan stated state law requires the Board to make three findings when hearing a variance that owing to the shape, topography or soils of the land but not affecting generally the zoning district in which it is located a literal enforcement of the bylaw would involve substantial hardship financial or otherwise and that desirable relief may be granted without detriment to the public good and without derogating from the intent or purpose of the bylaw. He questioned if it was possible to construct a smaller house?
Mr. Hardick stated the developer of the property retained the right to approve the house plans because he owns abutting building lots. Additionally the plans for the house took into consideration the scale of the homes existing in the neighborhood.
David Beaudoin questioned if it was possible to straighten the house and then the only thing that would not line up is the mud room?
Frank Carey questioned if it was possible to pivot the house?
Mr. Hardick stated they have turned, squished and changed the location of the septic system in an effort to avoid coming to the Board for a variance. The variances requested are the rear of the property, one for 7’ 11 inches and the other 7’ 2 inches.
Nicola Gioscia stated the house is going to be non-conforming somewhere and it appears the applicants have made every effort to keep the variance request to a minimum and also to make it at the rear of the property where it has not impact on homes already in the area.
David Jarvis questioned if the porch could be removed at the front of the house and the foundation for the home moved forward?
Mr. Hardick stated they thought of that and met Lorri McCool the Health Inspector for the Town of Monson on the site. Ms. McCool explained to them that they must keep the foundation of the house a certain distance from the septic system. The small porch does not have a foundation it is supported by sona tubes.
Nicola Gioscia stated he had no questions. The design of the home is in keeping with those in the neighborhood and the applicants have obviously gone to great lengths to fit a home on this lot.
8:45 David Beaudoin moved to close the hearing.
Nicola Gioscia seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
William Donovan stated the Board must make the three findings required by law. Certainly the shape of this lot is different from other lots in the neighborhood.
David Beaudoin stated the problem was created by the developer who split the lots out and then retained the right to approve the design of the home that was to be built.
Mr. Hardick stated it cost them $2000.00 for each house design and then another $500.00 every time the plan was changed. They are on the third architectural firm that is $6000.00 without counting the $500.00 for every change to each of the plans. They have also incurred the cost of another percolation test to change the location of the septic system from the rear of the property to the front and are now in the process of drilling a well and down over 500 feet. The well will cost a minimum of $10,000.00 this added to what they have already spent and the cost of the land they have a huge investment in this property. As the housing market is now they would never be able to get their money back on the property.
William Donovan stated the financial hardship is not of the applicants making and neither is the odd shape of the property. The lot is configured in such a way that it limits what can be done. The Board must be absolutely sure that it can meet the requirements of the law if it approves this variance. It must be sure this is an exception and not something that will regularly confront the Board.
Nicola Gioscia moved to approve the request for a variance of 7’ 11” and 7’ 2” from the rear 50-foot setback requirement for Lot 1 Hovey Road as shown on a plan dated 11/20/2007 prepared by Frank Creegan, Architect Job No: 071184 for the following reasons:
1. The parcel of land is an odd shape it has 512 feet of frontage on Hovey Road but very little depth. The side measurement on one side of the land is 114 feet and on the other 260 feet. The applicant has sited the proposed home on the widest part of the lot but is hampered in that it is triangular in shape. In order to accommodate the house, well, septic system and a driveway that avoids traffic over the septic system the applicant has limited options.
2. The shape of the land has created a financial hardship inasmuch as the applicant has incurred extra costs to develop house plans that accommodate the shape of the lot and are in keeping with the existing homes in the neighborhood. Additionally the applicant incurred further cost by changing the location of the septic system so that the variance requested is for the setback from the rear property line and will have little or no impact on the existing homes.
3. The design and scale of the proposed home is in keeping with the homes existing in the neighborhood and has the approval of the land developer. The granting of the variance would not negatively impact the value of the undeveloped land still owned by the developer, the existing homes or the appearance of the neighborhood.
David Beaudoin seconded the motion.
Each Board member voting was polled individually.
The Board voted unanimously 5-0 to grant the variance from the rear 50-foot setback.
David Beaudoin moved to adjourn at 9:40 P.M.
David Jarvis seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A. Hull
| 
