29-320 (3) ZBA Meeting Minutes - 6/7/95
Vice Chair Weil opened the Public Hearing on the request of John L.
Prystowski for a Variance under §10.9 of the Zoning Ordinance and
M.G.L. , Chapter 40A to attach a garage to the house with an 8' wide
X 19' long mud room at 415 Acrebrook Drive. Weil reviewed
procedures for conducting Public Hearings and read a copy of the
legal notice which was published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette on
May 24 and May 31, 1995.
The applicant, John Prystowski, was present to discuss the
application. He said he wants to build a mudroom to connect the
garage to the house. He said that he moved into the house in 1969,
and within 6-8 months of moving in, he and other neighbors were
told that the boundary lines were in error. His lot's boundary
lines were moved 10-12' closer to his house. If that error had not
occurred, he would not be in a position now to ask for a Variance.
Weil reviewed the Variance Ordinance and outlined the specific
criteria which need to be met before a Variance could be granted.
Weil asked the applicant to explain how he met the criteria.
Prystowski said that he met the criteria for a Variance because of
the size and shape of the lot since he did not have room on the lot
to meet the setback requirements, and a hardship due to expense
that would be needed to move the structure further back, and
because of potential danger from ice/snow falling from the roof
onto persons leaving the house in the winter.
No one spoke in favor or in opposition to the proposal.
Elaine Reall moved to close the Public Hearing. Alex Ghiselin
seconded the motion which passed unanimously 3:0
------------------------------------------------------------------
Elaine Reall said she was still not convinced that the Board could
not address this request in a more satisfactory way than to deny
the Variance request, and thought that the Board should do some
research and consult with staff.
Reall moved that the request for a Variance be taken under
advisement and a decision be rendered at the next ZBA meeting
scheduled for June 21, 1995. Alex Ghiselin seconded the motion
which passed unanimously 3:0.
-5-
ZBA Meeting Minutes - 6/21/95
4
applicant for the hardship criteria, but there were none.
Reall agreed that this request would not be a substantial
detriment to the neighborhood. She said she hoped that the
ordinance would be changed in the future to reduce the amount of
setback required to allow the joining of two structures on one
lot.
Reall said, however, that she could not in good conscience vote
in favor of this request and was prepared to vote to deny the
Variance.
Weil said that this case hinges on the ability of the applicant
to meet the criteria for a Variance. He said that he thought the
applicant only met the third criteria for a Variance which states
that the request, if granted, would not be a substantial
detriment to the public good. He noted that there was no
topographic problem, the situation is not unique, and the
hardship is technically and legally self-inflicted by the
applicant. Weil said that the applicant could eliminate the
hazard of snow and ice falling between the two buildings by
installing an awning on either structure but not connecting the
two buildings. Weil said he was unable to vote to approve the
Variance.
Elaine Reall moved to deny the Variance. Weil seconded the
motion which passed 2:1. Ghiselin voted in favor of the
Variance.
-4-
ZBA Meeting Minutes - 6/21/95
Vice Chair Weil said that the Board should be ready to render a
decision will be made on the request of John L. Prystowski for a
Variance under §5.2 of the Zoning Ordinance and M.G.L. , Chapter
40A to attach a garage to the house with an 8' wide X 19' long
mud room at 415 Acrebrook Drive.
Alex Ghiselin said that the first criteria in granting a Variance
was that the request be for a specific parcel of land or for an
existing building on the land, which he thought the applicant
obviously met. The second criteria states that there must be
circumstances relating to the soil conditions, shape or
topography, especially affecting such land or structures but not
affecting generally the zoning district in which it is located.
He said he could not find a way that the site meets these
conditions.
Ghiselin said that literal enforcement of the ordinance must
involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the
petitioner. He said that the garage is so close to the house
that it is almost an attached garage. He further implied that
the petitioner has brought the hardship upon himself by building
the garage so close to the house. However, he stated that he did
not believe that the applicant realized the difficulty that the
snow and ice load might have upon the safety and convenience of
his household and living conditions. Ghiselin said he thought
that to fix the situation now, would mean a substantial financial
hardship for the applicant since he did not see an easy solution
for a connection.
Ghiselin said that the criteria further stated that the request,
if granted should not be a substantial detriment to the public
good, or nullify or substantially diminish the intent and purpose
of the ordinance. He said that connecting the two existing
buildings which have the same ridge and roof line and mass does
not seem to substantially change anything. Ghiselin noted that
the Ordinance has been modified to allow�'ao ttaching garages to the
main building where it would not normally be allowed with a
Special Permit from the Planning Board. Ghiselin said he thought
this was a similar request and that this request falls within the
intent of the ordinance. Ghiselin further added that he did not
think that the request would cause a detriment to the
neighborhood. The Planning Office has advised the applicant
that a future change to the ordinance would have to be made to
allow situations similar to his request. Ghiselin said that
although he was very reluctant to grant a Variance, he would vote
in favor of granting the Variance.
Elaine Reall said she had thoroughly reviewed case law to try to
find something which might allow her to deviate from the criteria
for granting a Variance for this request. She said that she had
inquired at the last meeting whether there were any handicapp(-6
or elderly residents in the house which might qualify the
-3-
Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (MGL) , Chapter 40A,
Section 11, no Variance, or any extension, modification or
renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the decision
bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty days have
elapsed after the decision has been filed, or if such an appeal
has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded
in the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds or Land Court, as
applicable and indexed under the name of the owner of record or
is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The
fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner
or applicant. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to
pick up the certified decision from the City Clerk and record it
at the Registry of Deeds.
The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals hereby certifies that a
Variance has been Denied and that copies of this decision and all
plans referred to in it have been filed with the Planning Board
and the City Clerk.
Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 15,
notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the
Northampton City Clerk on the date below.
If anyone wishes to appeal this action, an appeal must be filed
pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 17, with the Hampshire
County Superior Court and notice of said appeal filed with the
City Clerk within twenty days (20) of the date of that this
decision was filed with the City Clerk.
DECISION DATE: June 21, 1995
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: June 29, 1995
Applicant: JOHN L. PRYSTOWSKI - 415 ACREBROOK DRIVE
M. Sanford All, Jr. , Vice Chairman
I� LIST,
Alex Ghiselin
Elaine M. Reall
-2-
lkILI , b r�; km
City of Northampton, Massachusetts E
Office of Planning and Development D � �I
City Hall • 210 Main Street
Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 ! FftIv"r°JS $
FAX(413) 586-3726 +�
•Community and Economic Development �z
•Conservation -Historic Preservation
•Planning Board•Zoning Board of Appeals
•Northampton Parking Commission
DECISION OF
NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
APPLICANT: JOHN L. PRYSTOWSRI
ADDRESS: 415 ACREBROOR DRIVE, NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060
OWNER: JOHN L. & ELIZABETH A. PRYSTOWSRI
ADDRESS: 415 ACREBROOR DRIVE, NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060
RE LAND OR BUILDINGS IN NORTHAMPTON AT: 415 ACREBROOR DRIVE
ASSESSOR'S MAP and PARCEL NUMBERS: MAP #29 PARCEL # 320
At a meeting conducted on June 21, 1995, the Northampton Zoning
Board of Appeals voted 2:1 to he request of John L.
Prystowski for a VARIANCE under the provisions of Section 5.2 in
the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, to attach a garage to a house
with an 8' wide X 19' long mud room at 415 Acrebrook Drive.
Board Members present and voting were: Vice Chair M. Sanford
Weil, Jr. , Members Alex Ghiselin and Elaine Reall.
In DENYING the request for a Variance, the Zoning Board of
Appeals found:
1. The Variance was requested for a specific parcel of land and
for an existing building.
2 . There are no unusual or unique circumstances relating to
soil conditions, shape or topography of the land or
structure.
3 . Literal enforcement of the ordinance would involve
substantial financial hardship to the applicant, however,
the Board found that the hardship was self-imposed because
the applicant had built the garage in its present location
within the past few years.
-1-
ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
BOARD OF ASSESSORS
ASSESSORS
Joan C. Sarafin, MA.A., Chairwoman i a Telephone
Robert C. Buscher, Secretary ° "
3
Edwin M. Padeck
APR O 2 6 1995_ P
CV
WALLACE J. PUCHALSKI MUNICIPAL BUILDING
212 Main Street
Northampton, MA 01060 I"[j L)
TO: THE NORTHAMPTON BOARD OF ASSESSORS
FROM: J o r N 1_ /J'/'% STD
(Individual or Company Name)
PHONE
DATE:
I/WE REQUEST FROM THE BOARD OF ASSESSORS, ABUTTERS LISTS FOR THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT C '' 6 n�J V DPI ✓ L
THE MAP AND LOT NU;iBER(S) OF TEE ABOVE PROPERTY ARE
THE NAME OF THE BOARDS) REQUESTING THIS LIST IS*
2.
3.
THE LIST IS REQUIRED FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSE:
�e/L ! .CC..
� l V
THE NUMBER OF COPIES OF THE LIST REQUIRED IS _ v
I UNDERSTAND THAT THE BOARD HAS UP TO SEVEN (7) WORKING DAYS IN WHICH TO
COMPLETE THE LIST-. REQUESTED, AND WILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL SEVEN (7) WORK-
ING DAYS FOR EACH SUBSEQUENT REQUEST.
I FURTHER UNDERSTAND THAT I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ERRORS CONTAINED HEREIN.
(/(Signature of Ap icant)
DATE LIST WAS COMPLETED
*IF YOU ARE UNSURE OF THE BOARDS REQUIRING THE ABUTTERS LISTS OR THE NUMBER.,
OF LISTS REQUIRED PLEASE CONTACT THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT.
Date Filed File No.
ZONING PERMIT APPL TION (510. 2)
1 •
Name of Ap licant: / p
Address: Telephone:
2 . Owner of Property: m c
Address: , C��F Telephone: tm,�
3 . Status of Applicant:_)QOwner Contract Purchaser
Lessee Other (explain: )
4 . Parcel Identification: Zoning Map Sheet/ '�A Parcel# S�,o ,
Zoning District(s) (include overlay A
Street Address
Required
5 . Exis-ting Proposed -by Zoning
Use of Structure/Property
(if project is only interior work s ip tt #6)
Building height
-Bldg. Coverage (Footprint
Setbacks - front ! 0
- side L: _R: —' _ML:
- rear •
Lot size
Frontage.
r Area Ratio
oOpen Space (Lot area minus
building and parking)
Parking Spaces
Loading
Signs
Fill (volume & location)
6 . Narrative Description of Proposed Work/Project: (Use additional sheets
if necessary)
7 . Attached- Plans: Sketch Plan Site Plan
3 . Certification: I hereby certify that the informa 1 nt T
is true and accurate to the best of my knowl d
)ate: ,
Applicants Signature•
THIS SECTION FOR OFFICIAL USE O LY:
Approved as presented/based on information presented
Openied as presented--Reason:
Special' Permit and/or Site Plan Required:
F4ni'n g R i Variance Required: �—
gnatur of nspector ate
ATE: Issuance of a zoning Permit does not renove an applicant's burden to comply Willi all zoning roquiroments and obtain all required pormits
,n tho Board of Hoaith, consorvalion Commission, Dapaamont of Public Works and otlicr appiicablo pormit granting aulhoritioa.
{
oj
a
I CITY OF NORTHAMPTON
MAY e V
II
D C= I he: J-O 14 N L. P y 3T- ow S � 1
ress: I /+< R L is(?-0- 6 K- 0 2 i �) E Telephone: S W--t- o /
2. Propeqy Owner's Name: Sv H N L f- CL 1 z/1 B c 7-11 /1 P2 y.s/v L-3 S,c ,
Address: q r s- fg 2 E �2 oo ;c D rz , v L` Telephone: 5W- o o i
3. Status of Applicant: vl Owner Contract Purchaser Lessee Other
(explain: )
L
4. Parcel Identification: Zonin Map #tri a`) Parcel #3�O ; Zoning District(s)
Street Addr
5. Variance is requested under Zoning Ordinance Section __, Page =_
6. Narrative Description of Proposed Work/Project: (use additional sheets if necessary)
Gam,. 3 X k .f_.C�IC�'Vs-�-> ,/f r.. iP. GAY--Z,Q �.t._R.L.-- Y� t-p—.,
Qir_ZV
7. State How Work/Proposal Complies with Variance Criteria: (See Applicant's Guide
and use additional sheets if necessary) y
' Ufi�f COL/
8. Attached Plans: Sketch Plan Site Plan None Required
9. Certified Abutters List from Assessors' Office must be attached.
10. Certification: I hereby certify that I have read the VARIANCE CRITERIA, and that the
information contained herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
Date: �j�-fit—9 S� Applicant's Signature:
OFFICE USE ONLY:
i
Date Filed: File #:
(zba/variance.zba 8/24/92)