ZBA sends message to Heights

The Zoning Board of Appeals last Wednesday offered a mild reminder to Heights Property Owners Corporation general manager Stella Lagudis that when the organization renders an opinion of an application, it must clearly state whether it’s the product of the HPOC Board or a subcommittee.At issue was an application from Scott Murphy for an expansion to his house at 8 Chequit Avenue. But the rebuke dates back to last July when the ZBA took HPOC to task for reversing its stand on another application.

Then, HPOC had submitted a letter objecting to an application filed by Alyssa Bliss of 11 Prospect Avenue to install an air conditioning unit. HPOC reversed itself when spokesman Wade Badger told the ZBA that in light of support for the project from Ms. Bliss’ neighbor, it was reversing its objection.

Ms. Lagudis and Mr. Badger were at last week’s meeting and both said that the HPOC Board had delegated the decision to a subcommittee to review Mr. Murphy’s applications and had no problem with it.

Going forward, ZBA chairman Doug Matz said he just wanted to assure that any communication from HPOC clearly stated whether it was the full board or a committee that was rendering an opinion and that there wouldn’t be reversals as happened in the Bliss case.

Mr. Murphy, who identified himself as a designer and builder as well as the owner of the property, told the ZBA when he purchased the house 12 years ago, he wasn’t married. Now he is married with two children, each of whom want their own rooms, necessitating an addition.

The expansion would be confined to the ground floor and Mr. Murphy said he had no problem with agreeing never to add a second story to the house if the needed variances are granted.

He wants to add a deck to the northerly front yard line of his house and add another bedroom and bathroom to accommodate his children’s needs.
To accommodate neighbors’ interests so that none of the work will affect their water views.

The second application on tap last week came from Glen and Amy Grabelsky of 6 Sandpiper Road to construct an addition 20 feet from the side yard line instead of the required 25 feet.

The aim is to move a laundry room from the middle of the house to an area near the kitchen and enlarge a den.

“This is not a huge house,” building permits coordinator Mary Wilson told the ZBA. She described the Grabelsky request as “a very modest proposal.”

Sam Case of Sherman Engineering, who represented the applicants, said he thought the layout the couple requested made the most sense.

Why is any renovation needed? Mr. Matz wanted to know.

“We need more room; it’s a very small house,” Ms. Grabelsky responded.

After a few questions from ZBA members, one of its members, Phil DiOrio, explained to the applicant that the reason for all the questions was to substantiate the decision. The ZBA can’t simply render a yes or no reason on an application, but must outline its reasoning, he said.

Both applications will be discussed at the ZBA’s work session April 15 with decisions likely to be rendered at the April 22 regular ZBA meeting.