TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Draft
Minutes 1 December 2, 2010
MEMBERS PRESENT: Stephen Wagner, Tom Berstene, Sandy Jeski, James Kupchunos
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Phil Koboski, sitting for vacancy
Stephen Lewis
STAFF PRESENT: Michele Lipe, Town Planner
Donna Thompson, Recording Secretary
The following are motions made during the December 2, 2010 Public Hearing/Regular Meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING
Chairperson Wagner called the public hearing to order at 7:30 pm
Appl. 2744-10 – Amber D. King, 6 Vintage Lane, South Windsor, CT - request for a 5 foot variance to Table 3.1.2A to allow an in-ground pool 15 feet from the property line (20 required), at 6 Vintage Lane, RR zone.
Peter DeMallie, Principal, Design Professionals, presented the application. Distributed 2 more letters of support and pictures of the property at this time. For a free form pool in southeast corner of property. The King’s have worked with pool contractor and landscape contractor to place pool in best location along with appropriate landscaping, fencing – privacy and obscures from neighbors view. Hardship: placement of septic system, placement of driveway, east and south is open space, corner lot. If variance not granted, pool would have to be 5 ft closer to house- too close. Mike Giannamore from Aqua Pools - ornamental fence is minimum 48 in. Mr. DeMallie - 5 ft closer is a safety factor, from in the house can see pool better and in pool better at proposed distance, also, exterior
pedestrian door should have landing, then lower step, then lower patio area for safety – recommended by professionals consulted. Pool location will not impact any neighbor directly. All 4 abutters support project.
Berstene: distance required between septic system and pool? 25 ft or if downgrading (which it is not) is 50 ft; problem with the 5 ft closer to house. Landscaping a factor, splashing from pool if closer a factor, deck configuration a factor – multiple levels necessary.
Lewis: if variance not granted, could they build another – smaller pool and different deck design? If closer would see less of pool, and in pool, would also be more splashing against house. Mr. King is unsure if would continue if variance is not granted – pool has been reduced from original design, is now 3 to 5 ft non-diving pool.
Kupchunos: how far deck from house? 14 ft, deck to pool 11-12 ft. Getting close to septic regulation if move pool.
Wagner: soil conditions mentioned at beginning of presentation - don’t affect pool, right? Correct.
Mr. Giannamore - fence on 3 sides, house is 4th side – no fence between house and pool.
Jeski: earthern berm belong to homeowner? It is on the open space.
Berstene: any regs about screening pool? No, you do not have to screen pool.
Chairperson Wagner closed the public hearing at 8:22 pm.
Appl. 2745-10 – Land Resource Consultants, Inc., 160 West Street, Suite E, Cromwell, CT - request for a 33 foot variance to Table 6.2.4A to allow a development 17 feet from the property line (50 required), at 1559 Sullivan Ave/29 Community Rd/1744 Ellington Rd, RC zone.
Applicant requested postponement until next ZBA meeting on 1/6/2011.
ITEM: Deliberative Session
Appl. 2744-10 – Amber D. King, 6 Vintage Lane, South Windsor, CT - request for a 5 foot variance to Table 3.1.2A to allow an in-ground pool 15 feet from the property line (20 required), at 6 Vintage Lane, RR zone.
Motion to: approve Appl. 2744-10 – Amber D. King, 6 Vintage Lane, South Windsor, CT - request for a 5 foot variance to Table 3.1.2A to allow an in-ground pool 15 feet from the property line (20 required), at 6 Vintage Lane, RR zone, as shown on the plans submitted.
Hardship: 1. Due to the lot being a corner lot and narrower due to open space to the south, the buildable area is greatly reduced; 2. The septic system occupies the side yard on the west, making that area not usable for a pool due to public health code requirements; 3. The variance for the pool will not adversely affect the other properties in the neighborhood.
Was made by: Commissioner Berstene
Was seconded by: Commissioner Koboski
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows: unanimous
REGULAR MEETING
ITEM: Minutes
Motion to: approve the minutes of October 7, 2010.
Was made by: Commissioner Berstene
Was seconded by: Commissioner Patterson
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows: unanimous
ITEM: Correspondence
ITEM: Other Business
ITEM: Adjournment
Motion to: adjourn the meeting at 8:52 pm
Was made by Commissioner Jeski
Seconded by Commissioner Berstene
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows: unanimous
Respectfully submitted:
Donna Thompson
Recording Secretary
| 
