The Town of Pompey Zoning Board of Appeals held their regular monthly meeting on Monday, September 11, 2023 at 7pm. A video of the full meeting can be viewed on the Town of Pompey Facebook Page.
Highlights of the meeting are as follows:
Harrington Homes Area Variance
First on the agenda was Harrington Homes’ application for two area variances to allow a reduction of .62 acres from the permitted minimum of two acres per lot, resulting in a lot size of 1.38 acres for each of two lots on Watervale Road.
A lengthy discussion was held, revealing a prior letter from 2021 from then Code Officer Robert Rodriguez stating that, due to the absence of properly filed subdivision maps and non-conforming acreage size, no permits would be issued. Tim Coyer of Ianuzzi and Romans — Site Planner for Harrington Homes — stated that signed subdivision plans from 1986 were located but, for unknown reasons, they were never filed with the County Clerk. He went on to say that Harrington is not trying to create new tax parcels — these lots already exist, as evidenced by the presence of the home on Lot 1. All three lots within the unfiled subdivision are identical in size (1.38 acres).
Harrington purchased the lots in February of 2020.
The Public Hearing session was then opened, with several Town residents expressing objections to reducing the permitted lot size, citing a bad precedent and negative impact on the neighborhood.
After closing the hearing, the zoning board then went into a brief private session at the request of the Town Attorney to discuss a legal issue under client-attorney privilege.
After returning from private session, Frateschi recommended that the Board not make a decision until he has the opportunity to do further research. The Board agreed to resume the discussion at their next regular meeting on October 9, 2023.
Double Swan Holdings/Michael Skeele Area Variance
The Board heard an appeal for a variance on the height and/or setback of an existing pole barn that was built to specs under an approved building permit but was later determined to be in violation of Town Code.
After making some calculations, the ZBA stated that the applicant would need a seven foot height variance in order to keep the building on its existing footprint.
A Public Hearing was opened, with several residents expressing concerns about their own approved permitted buildings coming into question after the fact as well, raising questions of who should be held responsible for associated costs to remedy said violations.
As an aside, Mr. Skeele spoke up to dispute claims that he was running an unpermitted business out of the barn, storing vehicles and equipment for a fee. He stated that he uses the building only to store his own equipment, as well as that of friends, and that no fees are charged.
After the Public Hearing was closed, the Board proceeded to go through the five conditions of area variance criteria to determine the impact on the neighborhood and environment. After considering each question, the majority of the Board agreed that, while seven feet is mathematically substantial, reducing the height of the building would make little noticeable visual impact, and it isn’t feasible to expect Mr. Skeele to go to the expense of reducing the height of the building. The Board voted, and a motion to approve was carried 3 to 2, granting the applicant his requested seven-foot height variance.
