Chairman Domenic N. Moschella called the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. Members present: Jeffery Slapikas, Betty Lou Holley, Martin Atkins and Fred Harkins. Alternates Present: George Havican and Joseph Commendatore.
Also Present: Bill Donovan, Temporary Clerk/Land Use Inspector
Correspondence: Planning & Zoning approved minutes for July 2, July 17, and August 7, 2002. Motion by F. Harkins, seconded by M. Atkins to place correspondence on file. Unanimous.
Clerical Bill: Motion by F. Harkins, second by J. Slapikas to pay the clerical bill. Unanimous.
Approval of Minutes: Motion made by M. Atkins, seconded by J. Slapikas to approve ZBA minutes of July 23, 2002 as amended. D. Moschella, M. Atkins, J. Slapikas voted to approve; B. Holley and F. Harkins abstained. Motion to approve carried.
New Business: Motion by M. Atkins, seconded by B. Holley to add Robert Pinto, 35 Union City Road, Prospect to the agenda under "New Business". Unanimous.
Vincent & Antonella Jacovino, 21 Trotters Way requesting a variance of Section 310 of the Zoning Regulations that requires a detached utility building to be located beyond the rear range line of the primary house. Mr. Jacovino presented a letter allowing Attorney Thomas P. Brunnock to represent the Jacovinos in this application. Mr. Brunnock related that the house itself is located at the rear 50-foot property line setback due to wetlands on the property, and therefore putting a detached building to the rear of this house would require a rear property line variance. The proposed utility building/garage would not extend beyond to the front range-line of the house. D. Moschella requested permission to inspect the property and for the owners to stake out the location of the proposed detached building. Motion by M. Atkins, seconded by J. Slapikas to accept Application #25-2002 from Vincent and Antonella Jacovino and schedule a public hearing for Septmeber 24, 2002 at 7:10 p.m. Unanimous.
Peter M. Sydoriak, 1 Corrine Drive requesting a variance of Section 300 of the Zoning Regulations that requires a 50-foot property line setback for a structure to be placed on his property at 77 Morris Road. This tree-sided parcel is fronted by Morris Road, Bronson Road and Clark Hill Road per Mr. Sydoriak's map submitted with his application, and therefore requires a 50-foot structure setback on all three sides. Mr. Sydoriak related he is seeking a 15-foot variance on Morris Road and a 35-foot variance on Terry Road to build a new house. Bill Donovan requested that he be allowed to personally meet with Mr. Sydoriak after the meeting to confirm from Mr. Sydoriak the exact variances and locations needed so that the legal notices and consequent public hearing will be consistent with Mr. Sydoriak's intended application. Motion by B. Holley and seconded by M. Atkins to accept Application # 26-2002 from Peter M. Sydoriak, seeking front street line variances to build a new house at 77 Morris Road and schedule a public hearing for September 24, 2002 at 7:20 p.m. Unanimous.
Batire Halim, 1 Roy Mountain Road requesting a variance of Section 300 of Zoning Regulations that requires a minimum 50-foot-front property line setback for a structure placed at her property at Lot 2, Elaine Court. Floria Polverari presented a letter from Mrs. Halim allowing Mrs. Polverari to act as agent for this application. Mrs. Polverari related that the owner recently built a new house on this parcel, and the Plot Plan shows the new house at 49.4 feet from the front property line. Accordingly, Mrs. Halim is seeking a one-foot front property line variance for this house location. Motion by B. Holley, seconded by F. Harkins to accept Application #27-2002 and schedule a public hearing for September 24, 2002 at 7:50 p.m. Unanimous.
Robert S. Pinto, 35 Union City Road. Mr. Pinto presented a letter from Eugene Ober who is the current owner of 30 Union City Road allowing Mr. Pinto to go forth with this application. Mr. Pinto is seeking a Certificate of Approval for Dealing in or Repairing Motor Vehicles per Section 14-54 of the Connecticut General Statues. Chairman Moschella noted that under the procedure, the Zoning Board of Appeals acts as an agent for the State in determining if this proposed use and location satisfy the criteria as stated in the Statues. Motion by J. Slapikas, seconded by F. Harkins to accept Application #28-2002 and schedule a public hearing for September 24, 2002 at 7:40 p.m. Unanimous.
Public Hearings:
7:10 p.m. ZBA Application #20-2002 of Thomas & Kimberly Fama, 93 Salem Road seeking a 12-foot left side line variance for an addition to the back of the existing house for construction of a master bathroom. The legal notice as published in the Waterbury Republican American on August 16 and August 23, 2002 was read into the record. Mr. Fama related the new proposed 12' X 17' addition would continue straight back from the existing house and not protrude closer to the left side property line. The house is located only 13 feet from the left property line, therefore the need for the variance. Fred Harkins queried if other variances had been sought for this property. Mr. Fama related that approximately two years ago, he did receive approval for a variance to extend off of the front of the house. There were no other comments from the board and no comments from the public. The hearing closed at 7:15 p.m.
7:20 p.m. ZBA Application #21-2002 of Steven and Margaret LaFlamme, 10 Heritage Drive, seeking an 8-foot right sideline variance for construction of a two-car garage. The legal notice as published in the Waterbury Republican American on August 16 and August 23, 2002 was read into the record. Mr. LaFlamme stated he desires to construct an addition to the existing garage located on the right side of the house. Chairman Moschella asked what the hardship might be for this request. Mr. LaFlamme related he needs winter storage for his cars and a place to keep his lawn and pool equipment. Chairman Moschella further asked what is there about the property that is unique or poses severe restrictions to reasonable use of his property. J. Slapikas asked if the structural design of the proposed garage is realistic in design for safe access and egress. Margaret LaFlamme stated it is. M. Atkins asked the applicant for an explanation of what they see as the unique hardship with their property that requires a variance of the zoning regulations in order to build this addition. Marget LaFlamme mentioned the location of the pool and septic, and the current location of the driveway. D. Moschella related that their property is conforming by zoning description, and therefore the board is required to ensure conformance with the regulations or unless the applicant can demonstrate just cause for relief from the regulations. Chairman Moschella asked for comments from the public. Charles LaFlamme, father of the applicant, believes the proposed location of the garage addition works best architecturally and aesthetically with the property and neighborhood. Paul Krisavage, 11 Stonefield Drive has questions as to the hardship of the property. Concerned with the garage becoming a business; i.e. auto dealing or other use. D. Moschella read into the record a letter from Debra Cipriano, 6 Heritage Drive opposed to the variance. There were no other comments, and the public hearing was closed at 7:29 p.m.
7:30 p.m. ZBA Application #22-2002 of Counterpoint Communications, Inc. 37 Peach Orchard Road requesting a variance of the regulations governing approved signs in a residential zone to allow the placement of a detached sign (3'X5') identifying the location of the exisiting "Office of Radio & Television" at 37 Peach Orchard Road. Chairman Moschella removed himself because of a potential conflict of interest in that he is a neighboring landowner to this application. Martin Atkins assumed the role of Chairperson and seated J. Commendatore in place of D. Moschella. The legal notice as published in the Waterbury Republican American on August 16 and 23, 2002 was read into the record. Mary Byczynski of the Connecticut Council of Catholic Women, Archdiocese of Hartford appeared as agent for this application. Ms. Byczynski related the sign will provide a signed location of the property for persons coming for daily mass, meetings or other matters. Ms. Byczynski presented a rendition of the proposed sign that would be a gift presented by the Council of Catholic Women. M. Atkins asked Bill Donovan for a clarification of the zoning regulations that related to this application. Bill explained that the regulations limit allowed signage in a residential zone to: (1) a Home Occupation; (2) Real Estate Sales, or (3) a Subdivision Development. As the proposed sign is for a legal non-comforming commercial use of residential property and does not fall into the above permitted uses, a variance is required. M. Atkins asked for comments from the board or the public. It was felt that a sign for a commercial business could prompt other like signs to begin to appear in the neighborhood which would take away from the existing residential character. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed at 7:39 p.m. Chairman Moschella was reseated for Alternate J. Commendatore.
ZBA Application #23-2002 of Batire Halim, 1 Roy Mountain Road requesting a 125-foot variance of the minimum 150-foot front property line requirement for a new residential lot to allow a 25-foot wide driveway for street access to a proposed rear lot at 22A Roy Mountain Road. Floria Polverari acted as agent for this application. It was noted that th elegal notice as it appeared in the Waterbury Republican American listed the property location of the requested variance at 1 Roy Mountain Road -- not 22A Roy Mountain Road. Because of this error, the board could not go forward with the public hearing, and re-scheduled the hearing for the next meeting on September 24, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. It was further pointed out that the applicant's map differs from the application in that the map has the proposed driveway width at 20' whereas the application refers to a variance necessary for a 25' driveway. Mrs. Polverari consequently amended the requested variance from 125 feet to 130 feet.
ZBA Application #24-2002 of Alfonso and Ellen DeMagistris, 2 Meadow Lane requesting a 42-foot rear line and an 18-foot front street line variance to construct a 31' X 36' detached garage. The public hearing opened at 7:50 p.m. and Chairman Moschella read into the record the legal notice as published in the Waterbury Republican American on August 16 and August 23, 2002. Mr. DeMagistris related he would like to convert the existing garage into a dining room and computer room and the proposed garage is necessary to allow indoor storage of his vehicles and yard equipment. Mr. DeMagistris stated this is a corner lot and requires a 50-foot setback for a structure on both sides of the lot facing a street in addition to the 50-foot rear property line setback. Chairman Moschella asked if there were other unique features about his property that prevents the proposed garage from being placed further away from the property lines. Mr. DeMagistris stated the location is desired to reduce the length of the driveway and be partially hidden by trees. Chairman Moschella asked for comments from the public. Chris Owens, 8 Meadow Lane expressed concerns. There were no other comments and the public hearing closed at 8:08 p.m.
Action on Applications
ZBA Application #20-2002 of Thomas & Kimberly Fama, 93 Salem Road. Motion to approve Application #20-2002 by J. Slapikas, seconded by F. Harkins for a 12-foot left side line variance for a house addition. Discussion: D. Moschella stated because the addition goes straight back from the existing house and would not be closer to the property line, there would not be an increase in the existing non-conformity in that the house is located 13-feet from the property line. M. Atkins agreed the addition would not be an added intrusion to the property. Chairman Moschella called for a vote. In favor: Unanimous. Reasons: Proposed addition will not be placed closer to the property line than the existing house, will not be visible from the street and is consistent with the development of the neighborhood.
ZBA Application #21-2002 of Steven and Margaret LaFlamme, 10 Heritage Drive. D. Moschella stated the lot is conforming in size and shape, and the proposed garage encroaches near to a neighbor's property. He did not feel the applicant demonstrated a hardship for the variance. J. Slapikas related the lot was an approved and conforming lot within a subdivision and sees no justification for creating a non-conformity by allowing a proposed garage to be extended within the sideline setback area. Motuion to approve Application #21-2002 for an 8-foot right side line variance for construction of a two-car garage. Seconded by B. Holley. In favor: none, Opposed: 5. The motion to approve was denied. Reasons: The applicant did not establish hardship.
ZBA Application #22-2002 of Counterpoint Communications, Inc. 37 Peach Orchard Road. Chairman Moschella excused himself during the discussion. M. Atkins assumed the Chair position and seated J. Commendatore for D. Moschella. M. Atkins stated he has concerns with this application in that the land itself is residential and the regulations are quite specific on what type and size of signs are allowed in a residential zone. B. Holley stated she appreciates the offer being made by the Connecticut Council of Catholic Women, and stated the proposed sign is very attractive, however she too cannot support the application because it is in a residential zone and many neighbors have expressed their opposition. J. Slapikas concurred with the opinion of the other board members. Motion by J. Commendatore, seconded by J. Slapikas to approve Application #22-2002 for a 3' X 5' detached sign at 37 Peach Orchard Road. In favor: none; Opposed: 5. The motion to approve was denied. Reasons: Placement of a large sign for a commercial enterprise in a residential zone is not allowed per Zoning Regulation. There was no justifiable hardship presented.
ZBA Application #24-2002 of Alfonso and Ellen DeMagistris, 2 Meadow Lane. D. Moschella stated in his opinion the proposed garage is a large structure for this and consquently requires a significant variance. J. Slapikas related he is not in favor of granting two variances for one structure, which is what this application seeks. Motion by J. Slapikas, seconded by M. Atkins to approve Application #24-2002 for a 42-foot rear line and an 18-foot front street line variance to construct a 31' X 36' detached garage. In favor: none, Opposed: 5. The motion to approve was denied. Reasons: A double variance on one lot is not in the best interest of the neighborhood or the Town of Prospect.
Public Participation: None
Adjourn: Motion by G. Havican, seconded by J. Slapikas to adjourn at 9:25 p.m. Unanimous.