Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVariance (33) APPLICATION FOR TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1. Application and supplements must be filed in triplicate. 2. Application must be typewritten or printed in ink. 3. Answer all items, with particular attention to Page 3. 4. Application must be delivered to Chairman or Secretary no later than 15 days prior to first Thursday of each month. Submit application as soon as possible because it will be returned if incomplete or not described satisfactorily. 5. The applicant or his representative must be present for the Board Meeting (time and place to be advised). TO BE COMPL TED Y BOARD ��• L �77G Filed � .1 k Applicant � c (D A T E) . � ( �I�/1. . . . . . . a .Qi� . . . . . Fee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mailing Address 95" / r Receipt No. Is applicant a corporation, co-partnership or individual? • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • If corporation list names of officers, if co-partnership — owners: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Address: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Address: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Address: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Is applicant owner, lessee or prospective tenant? . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • Check one of the following: REQUEST VARIATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE: To vary Article . . �.��.. • • . • . . Section . b-45* . . . . . . . .UW to allow . /' �Q.�1ZC�• �v1-• ,eZ)1r�!. 1,*e � 17i'0*fAl•�'t5!r�.��' e��/�?�,11 ❑ OR SPECIFIC EXCEPTION OR ❑ APPROVAL UNDER Section• • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • toallow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ❑OR AN APPEAL FROM THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION INVOLVING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ❑ OR STATE HEARING UNDER 14-321 ❑ OR 14-54❑ OF THE GENERAL STATUTES FOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L7 OR TEMPORARY AND CONDITIONAL PERMIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T •�,t• .'" on premises known as qt ,s EE Zone ANO OE • ' • • • • • • • • • • , . . . . . . ddress Owner of property 64. State the particular hardship or unnecessary difficulty that prompts this application: • • • • • • • �~ • • • • • • J . rid. ♦ . i .'. . . . r s "e1✓ r. �Y. t i (Continue on Page 4) Signature of applicant.. . . . . : �i. . . :` �;":� . . . .�.' . : `-:�' . . '`r'•a. . or . . . . . . . . .r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A This application was executed by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Attorney or Authorized Agent) in behalf of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Applicant) Liquor Outlets Within the Restricted Area Locations and Distances from Location in Question Liquor outlets listed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distances' listed by . . .. .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - ' i • Indicate plot by diagram, photographs and/or letters, in space below, showing streets, lot lines, building line, zone boundary lines, dimensions and buildings present and proposed. It is important to include adjacent properties with dis- tances from subject property. In case of structural changes or new structure blue print or drawing made to scale must be submitted with this application. ACTION OF THE BOARD at the meeting held on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GRANTED DENIED i r J.fit' • • . •/.// ' • .'A�/f�—i.. //// • _� t+--li.v- .. . . . . . . . . . . • • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Restrictions: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . see . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . —3— TOWN F SOUTH'cWINDSOR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS i4 i 1 Receivedfrom ------- --------- -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------- of�, --------------- -------------------------A-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- __:____ Dollars fee for a hearing before the Zoning Aoprd of �-ppeals. This hearing is to cover application number________-___------_-------------for____--------_--------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------i,------#. -- -------------- --- ,X------ ------------------------------------ -)+- Dated at South Windsor Conn.,this day of-____ -------------------------------------------------19______. �D -1 Signed------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- SECRETARY June 21, 1978 Mr* Edward W. Kasheta, Jre 95 Ident Rd So* Windsor, cte 06Q74 Dear fir. Kasheta s Rot Appeal No* 1274*-78 Your appl i caati on to the South Windsor Zoning Board of Appeals will be heard at a public hearing on Thursdaky$ July 6, 1978, at 7:34 pe m: in the oounoil chambers of the Town Hall in South Wi,ndsore You, or someone representing you, must be present. The enclosed form must be completed by you whore indicated by inserting the legal description of your prpperty and the name of the om*ro A sample of a legal description is onolosede You *an gat they description to your property from your deed. If the variance you requested is granted, the form will be signed by the Chairman of the ZBA# and returned to you„ and you must then have it recorded in the Town Clerk's Office* Please be certain you bring this form with you the might of the hearing. I an enclosing a receipt for the $30 application fee. Yours very truly* vg Robert W. Warren, Chairman encase Zoning Board of Appeals HERMAN MASKEL VITO COVENSKY FRANCIS ROSSI PRESIDENT & TREASURER VICE PRESIDENT. CONSTRUCTION CHIEF ENGINEER - VICE PRESIDENT SECRETARY MSI�EL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. P.O. BOX 53 TELEPHONE 1209 JOHN FITCH BLVD. 289-9329 SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 6 July 1978 To : South Windsor Zoning Board of Appeals South Windsor , Conn . Gentlemen , We feel that the building of a house at the end of Ident Road by Edward Kasheta of South Windsor does not reduce the value of our property . In fact , it is our feeling that this building will increase the value of our property . Thank you . Very truly yours , MASKEL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY , NC . Herman L . Rosen ROAD BUILDERS—STORM i SANITARY SEWERS—WATER MAIN INSTALLATIONS—SITE DEVELOPMENTS EXCAVATORS--EARTH MOVERS—EQUIPMENT RENTALS 'V-a . o-itiq �.r� �L� G%Y-lam-✓ ol Transcript of portion of public hearing of Zoning Board of Appeals held on July 6, 1978, concerning application No. 1274-78, Edward W. Kasheta, Jr. . Members present: Warren, Eriksson, Murrin Alternates Presents Earley (sitting for Cowles) Warren: Next application is application 1274, Edward Kasheta, 95 Ident Road, requesting a variance to allow a building lot with less than the required frontage. Throwe: Chairman and members of the Zoning Board, my name is James Throwe and I live on 1330 Main Street,^huth Windsor, and I'm an attorney representing Edward and Susan Kasheta. You have this MBt map? /D Warren: Pieces of it seconds unintelligible)* Throwe: This is an application by Mr. and Mrs. Kasheta for a variance. They presently own a house on Ident Road where the live. The have been deeded a parcel of land �� . y y p � Kasheta, Sr. which is at the very end of Ident Road, which was part of the Kasheta Farm, which has been handed down from father to son, to grandson, to great-grandson .A Property from the Connecticut River out to Ellington Road was- originally a colonial grant and it was, as far back as I can remember member it, a�rirfare, kmllyx vs IA) rQ n 4 M r'11 l rA ° owned by one of the Stoughton families ( ) now AAMM is/located, and Eddie's great-grand- father, whose name was Peter Kasheta, worked f orr�toughtom as A a hired hand, almost like an indentured servant, and through shear work they ended up buying the farm from Stoughton. He handed it down to his son, Walter Kasheta, and when Walter died . -2- _CL Aj..� ef the land was divided between ( Walter, one of whom was Eddie Kasheta, Sr. , and he ended up with all the property from Main Street u t to land in back of Glendale Road, and not too long ago he gave a portion of t at land to Ed, Jr. and the intention tkox T�V� 0..*4 a.- was that he would develop arm. The family has always been involved in farming even though the father has an outside job, and Eddie works for the Town of South Windsor. You can go up and down Main Street and see them raising tobacco, and various vegetables. He has a lovely home on Ident Road, wMeb he o.4 keeps up very well. I have a map in my basement withf+1rs -which shows shows a great bid where his hou e ti; P'Lwz�_4 i graphs w 1 g ( U� now and you can seeA grass an shrubs jot 1 kvjse . When the town straightened out Ident Road, I have the original map, the intention was - there was an old trail that ran th - and they, the town to k over and created the property (unintelligible word or two) ahtmok is now Ident Road, d there was a proposed cul-de-sac right at the edge of that road +a .ntelligible word) land that is shown (unintelligible - two or three words) . That cul-de-sac is shown on the town map is no#-where it presently exists. It exists about 50 feet up the road, directly in front of (unintelligible) .S'o *he road itself, going into the Kasheta land, J rt v&-co that would be a •gym .. wkicak would connect with the cul-de-sac that presently exists. His property abuts the 50 foot right of way of the road called Ident Road, so the only frontage he has on Ident Road is that 50 feet, although he has land on both sfx sides of it and if the cul-de-sac weabuilt the way cul-de-sacs are supposed to be built, he might have the appropriate curbial lineage for frontage, but they didn't, jhey left it with a stub and it is -3- shown on the map here and that's the 50 foot stub* Now, he has a requirement (unintelligble) 40,000 sq* fto and he has several acres. What he wishes to do with the property is to build a homestead on it, and to farm it the same as his father farmer S land that he haS9 and theA when he builds his own ,home he would sell the one he lives in and move into itIhimself. The property - part of it is in the Wetlands - not where he intends to build - but part of it that curves around the back where there's a brook that meanders through there called Stoughton Brook, and, so he would have to go to the Inland-Wetlandsand get approval from them, if this Board, this Commission grants thp&variance, I don't see too much problemj5,A' toot of the land is very high and dry. It's one of the highest points along this ridge runs almost right along Ident Road then comes - feathers out when you get down near the.South iere�--�unintelligible� near the Pratt-Whitney plant. There is a definite hardship here because of the large piece of property abuts T+ v 10 a road that ends in a and was constructed by the Town of South. Windsor and was not created. It was ( � • There is no other way of getting out to *be street. There is a road that goes across Stoughton Brook, that goes through other property and that road is not passable at all times. It's extremely long - it's several thousand feet long. This property, all he would need would be a driveway# * go into his main house and garage, and the onlyother building he would have would be - there are�tin barns � g am on the propertyAhe would continue to use. The Commission, in its u1ndsxmx wisdom, has in the past granted similar applications. There was one, I think, on Abby Road. There was the (unintelligible) farm off Deming Street, and one other. All similar situations -4- Ia where there were lar e^landau, left over from old f arms, and the person desired to keep the property intact and continue farming and that's what Eddie Kasheta wants to do. He wants to have something he can live in until his old age. There are some neighbors , T "the area who wish to speak in favor of it and I have ave some letters from some of the residents on Ident Road who were unable to attend but have furnished Mr. & Mrs. Kasheta with letters conerning their feelings in the matter. I have one from Mr. & Mrs. Bitgood, Fred Bitgood;4110 Ident Road, who said the have objections to th � y no � e request of Mr. and Mrs. Edward Kasheta to build a home at the end of Ident Road and they favor it. I have one from Mary LeBlanc of 96 Ident Road , who says she finds no objections to the variance of Edward Kasheta, Jr. , allowing him to build a house on his property at the end 9f Ids nt Road . I have one from the Maskel Construction Company eb-butting owner on the east, saying they feel the building of a house at the end of Ident Road by Edward Kasheta does not reduce the value of our property,, It is our feeling that this building will increase the value of our prpperty.�ltigned by Herman Rosen of the Maskel Construction Company. I don' t want to take up all your time, but this is extremely important to Edward Kasheta and his wife. He has always been tied to this area. He farms and he farms actively, He knows how to take care of the land. (Unintelligible word) having problems with the (unintelligible)- six or eight words) with the Town of South Windsor. This Board would have the opportunity to help him preserve this land at the end of Ident Road,,, sfhe alternatives that exists on some of this land are for someone to go in and build a small sub-division. That's not what he's trying or intends to do. -s- -7J.ics This property that backs up to me, they wanted to build a sub-division several years aga. That never went through. That's right in back of his present home. (X,l*X #BXdrddXddddXKXX #XX #4MXX (Tape ended - new tape was started)* this general area. There are el residential homes which have g y a e been built in the last ten gears. His hone would be back up off be a - to to of Main Street and would/benefit/both Main Street and/the Ident Road � ��c4riovs area. As you know, Ident Road is ( area because at the end of Ident Road we have some Industrial buildings and as you come into the wooded section of Ident Road there are some very nice single family homes which were built not too long ago . Every time you get an opportunity to improve the site such as would be done with a residential home and small farm. I think it's a benefit to the town and helps to create an effective buffer between commercial and industrial zones and residential areas. There is a fairly narrow strip along fain Street and abutting streets. I see no s question that there def initely �awerst hardship that prevents him from using this land, rural-residential land, and it's intended use is completely in keeping with the area and the sentiments of the neighbors who have voiced themselves in wrting, and those who are here personally. Eddie Kasheta and his wife, Susan, are both ready and here, and are/willing to answer any questions. Thank you. 'barren: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of this appeal? Yes. Rinaldi: My name is Anthony M. Rinaldi. I live at 80 Ident Road. and I do not object to it. In fact, I assure you they keep their land up very nicely and it will bring the value of our property up also. -6- Warrant Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of this appeal. Lajzim: My name is Jerry Lojzim. I live at 119 Ident Road. I'm accompanied by my wife, Ann. We're the next to the last house on Ident Road . Eddie's house certainly is an asset to our street. I am very much in favor of large tracts of land. I believe that what he is trying to do will be an asset to our area. We do not object and would like to see this variance granted. Warren: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor? Vibert: I'm Joseph Vibert, 1254 Main Street and my wife and I would like to go on record as being in favor of this application. At the present time this seems to be a no man's land, in that Many bikes , motor mikes, snowmobiles, etc, can come in at the end of Ident Road, cross this property, then go in the woods in back of our property and come out on Governor's Highway. We sit on our back porch on a summer's night like tonight and the motorcycles just there grind away back and forth, back and forth. Where if tkkxa was a resi ence here, this would be controlled pretty well. I'm not saying Kashet" would stop it completely, but at least with a house there, I'm quite sure it would automatically be controlled without any cost to the town or other property owners in the area. So, I think it would be very beneficial to Main Street in this respect, plus it would create a good,sure buffer zone between the industrial zone and the Main Street residential zone . I have a small map here showing our property. This is Main Street . . . .this is (voice fadedix 5 seconds unintelligible). Warren: The drive WXcomes up here . eacess to the -7- motorcycles? Vibert: The side road's here. Motorcycles come across here, and this is all wooded. They go across here and out on Governor's Highway (5 seconds unintelligible). Warren: Thank you. Vib ert: Thank you. Warren: Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of this appeal? Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition? Weintrahb: Yes. My name is J. Weintraub. I'm a partner in the law firm of Rome and Case in Bloomfield , and I'm here tonight on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Dennis Brown of 131 Ident Road. If you will look at the map that was filed with the application, you will find Mr. Brown's property is just to the north of the property in question . Warren: Unintelligible - about 2 seconds. Weintraub: That's correct. It's just to the north of the property in question and west of Ident Road I believe on that AAW=map there's a little box here that says i gt. ble) . It's going to be hard not to sound un-,American, opposing tan application on property with all that tradition in back of you - �. Wanting to farm, and so forth6o I want to clarify it. I don't want to actually oppose the application as much as to qualify it or attempt to condition it. I'd like to point out, if I could, that we're talking -P ro VA about a variance of a frontage requirement a 150 feet to 50 feet if I'm not mistaken. That's frontage on a street. Now, your Zoning Regulations def ine a street in Section 2x1Sxkx 1.19b to 4e�-IAA°� a road or street and improved to a degree of traffic safety and which will handle storm water adequately. w8- Now, if I can just go back and go over some of the events that occurred the past year regarding the property in question with and Mr. Brown's property, I think I can tie it in = some of the problems we have on definition of frontage and street. As it was pointed out, the cul-de-sac did not really end abutting Mr. Kasheta's property, but there's a little stem, and it's the stem that's caused the proVlem5 there the past year. The property was conveyed to Mr. Kasheta approximately one year ago and shortly thereafter o� for several days Mr. Kasheta brought in some equipment, bulldozer, whatever, and proceeded to fill in where that stem is and *=kx*x111g1b1*x the immediate area. wmx't*x Unfortunately, the bulldozer, and I'm not trying to imply by any means for purposes of our discussion here that there was any intention or maliciousness there, but the bulldozer did cross over Mr. Brown's property at the corner. I believe there were a couple of beech trees that were killed in the process In addition, there was quite a bit of fill that was either brought in or pushed on Mr. Brown's property. It never was pointed out there were some discussions that there was a tresspass, and I'm not sure it�v nw �7 o" entirely resolved. Again, I'm not, I don't want to imply there was any intention, ► probably, =;t, but there were some trees that were killed and the fill that was brought inf I think is causing some other beech trees to die. Mr. Brown has contactedI 7-ree 4&:�! a "tr. . n�� h - of the M - �°"0 1 14al. eemp&W, I believe the ehere in South 'Windsor and Mr.DBrian has pointed out that some of these beech /s oiler trees including a 19 inch i be- ch tree and oneA-e� 20 inches, is dying pevs 1 because of the fill. L crushed the roots or something of that sort. I'm not an expert myself, I'm not in that field, but he did point out they're dying because of the fill that was brought in. He'1S f r t -�. these trees and do something to make them live. I'm not sure what the outcome will be. In addition to problems with the trees, there were some depressions that were left. The depressions in the soil, one of them is actually on Mr. Browns property Antbbr depression is approximately between the stub xx t the extention of IdentRAM and Air. Brown's property. Again, these depressions, when there is rainfall, will fill up with water and there�s no run-ofrom t�csra them. It just sits there k •�) �-� s��s t some unintelligibl-/Ow ) Now, Mr. Brown has had/expense and some ( problems4 One is the dying trees. He had to have a survey donefi%stablish&W where his lines were. It cost him over a hundred dollars The tree expert cost him another hundred dollars. He had some pipes he brought in to try to take the water from the depression on his property off his property. That another $50, thereto legal expense over this, and there's some erosion also, that wasp•Concurring before, If you can imagine again, Mr. Brown's property at that corner sloping dorm and then several feet, maybe as much at 10-12 feet, I'm not certain, of fill being fknndxi xx brought in and leaving depressions, just dirt, there's going to be erosion, r c ions t nothin else being dose to prevent that. if there's no p e auti , g g p Again, I'm pointing this out not to oppose the variance. Were not objecting that there be a house on that property I think it's very commendablelthere be just one house sv on eight acres rather than jamming in as many as you can get, but insure we want to kaxmars that Mr. Browns safety and healt h is also protected and the integrity of his private land is also protected. And, I don•t believe it is as things stand right now with the -io- � n � extention of IdentRoad A ). I was out there today myself. I walked that extention and it's a severe drop from the cul-de-sac. It's mud. It's not what I would call a street as used in your zoning regulations. As .a matter of &act, I understand 5 t it's necessar and I hi nk Mr. Kash to has that when it �to we , y, found it neces ar to use the road in back. (, .+� wgvdv*. So, we have situation where there are cars and trucks going in front of Mr. Brown's house and in back of his house at various times What we would like to see, and perhaps we could have some agreement tonight from Mr. Kasheta, and-we would like to have conditions imposed on granting the variance as follows: First, the extention of Ident Road beyond the cul-de-sac to the boundary of Mr. Kasheta's land is dinished and conforms to the S f a�i'f Ica*o re s construction of the rest of Ident Road. Second, id that proper drainage be installed to meet the standards of whatever the State public safety code_$might apply. This drainage will insure $he extention of Ident Road will not wash away which again I!AM t�� Z;1` ko� f Mr. Bro •s property abutting �. that no erosion o Brown's p pe ty a g azx occur and��drainage sure that the Ident Road will a � tax depression there y xisting not be allowed to fill up with water without s o*e drainage being provided to carry away that water. ind I the last condition that we ask for, is third, that Mr. Kasheta agree not as an alternative route, to use the road in back of Mr. Brown's hounel So that he is not literallN surrounded by vehicles in both front and back of his house . In conclusion, (unintelligible ^ or 3 seconds) the praahka preamble of pa poxxxof the zoning regulations the purpose of the regulations -11- is to promote health, safety, morals and general welfare of the commun- ity= that's all I'm asking you to consider, Mr. Brown's safety and health if you grant this variance. And, I think the only s the conditions that I s esnd way to do that is to impose e �g I also would ask you that before you make a final decision, to please go out and take a look at this stub, because it is not a street as any of you think of a street or a street that can be used on any regular basis. There will be continual problems if nothing more is done and it is not brought up to standards of the rest of Ident Road. Otherwise, Mr. Brown has no;` objections to Mr. Kasheta being his neighbor, to putting a nice house in the back there, preserving the integrity of the neighborhood (unintelligible) and soi forth. But, I think some provision has to be made to insure that the is brought up to some standard along with the rest of the streets in town . Warren: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in opposition? Is there anyone else who would like to speak? Throwe t I'd like to say a few words in rabtta.. Warren: I don't know about rabuttal, but we'll give you a chance to talk to use if you like •f 7'.4, Throwe: raising the question of the ro d �a�town road and the improvements rovements what was done �©c concerning a � , p that were made to 114 that town road, were made by Mr. Kasheta, by authority of the town , with the permission of the town, so he could get into his property so the town avoided the cost of it. I had some discussions with Mr. Weintraub's law firm about he claimed damage, and we offered to pay for certain expense f incurred, and we never heard again until this application. I don't think this is the proper forum to discuss it. It's something that's not involved with this particular petition. What they're objecting to is his improving a town road. The conditions they're asking for - the"tre asking him to improve a town road. How he gets into his property and what he does to a portion of the land that belongs to the Town of South Windsor, that's who owns it. They owned it as a road, and it goes right 4to theproper$y that was formerly Walter and � s Mary Kasheta and it's now his 3*0-s between him and the Town, What they want to do, and wh t they want him to do. His intention is not to build a highwayrw His intention is to put a driveway in that will go into his property. This is the same as the house that Cody built on the end of Palmer Drive that Bob Sheridan just bnaght and other propertisin the town. I, think those questions N, s 4", S 4o otw about b the use ofop dperty, but only the problems A;�� ,A�that existed with that culdl-sac since Ident Road was changed from a farm road to a half-way straight road 4.. The right of way.. . .the use of the land behind Mr. Brown;S is Kasheta's . . .land that Kasheta taA" - rents from We its owlier, Joseph , and there•s of arum road in there ands 4b" use it. It has nothing to do with this property or the other property. It's land that Joe S rents out for d this year 1J � renti to^Kash 's farming an y i •M;4Q 1 ; 1;41%1 e to grow crops on ii. There's a dirt road anxi l that exists on thAf arm land. I' can't add anything to it except what Joe Vibert said about the motvr bikes (unintelligible - 2 or 3 seconds ), Warren: We'll have questions from the Board. 1 � Warren: Im not sure I understand the whole 9 tupLtione I'm a little bit confused over what seems to be paradoxal problem. The objections to the fill and the objections to the depression. that would mean If, for example, there was additional fill put in KKXH kxxnxmore problems with the tree. If the depression is left it will collect water. How do you resolve the-kind of problem? Is this a problem a normal engineer could handle? DLL, - ;�%0TV I really don't know. The depression right now, LOW there are no trees growing out of the drpession so I would guess if more fill were brought in to fill the depressions in Us it would not kill any more trees. Warren: 0. K. The additional fill would be M c b e_ - acceptable solution and that fill would go (unintelli ble4 property orA Brown's property? , Ujq�t)Uolwewt I think some of it -on�'%Mr. Brown's property. As I indicated, initially fill was placed on Mr. Brown's property (unintelligible) and leaving a depression on his property. Also a depression ( 3,.A,iL" the nub,the extention of Ident Road going into Mr. Brown's property. Warren: (unintelligible - about 4 seconds) W s Yes. Warrens (unintelligible - 2 seconds ) Well, no. It's between the extention of Ident. I t Not the terminus, but the side of the extention Mr. Brown's property. 5D Warren: of as far as the current filled drive-way that Mr. Kasheta has. -nL3srv�+s:~•r Th t s right. Then that's the second depression that UQV-;L 10 .-14- I'm referring to. It probably could be just filled in. Again, I don't know much about drainage, but it is collecting water, it is causing erosion from Mr. Brown's prope ty s welljs eve tuarcl� H"A:4 I wo d imagine from the road itself* partially wiped out and more fill had to be brought in I think it really needs some improvement. I'm not suggesting a highway . ice► wouldn't even want that. #etd like to keep the rural nature of the property. They want a road there that's going to stay, that's not going to wash away (unintelligible 2 seconds ) erosion. Erode away, cuts away his property where it ends or abuts the roadway. Unintelligible - 2 seconds. Warren: Do you know how it oocurred that the. . .that the paved town right-of-way ended right at Mr. Brown's property instead of Mr. Kasheta's property? Weintraub: Ido not know that. I do know that Mr. Brown's deed, and I only found out about this yesterday so I didn't have time to look further, in his deed there is some , and I donot know what the town's obligation is, but when the cul-de-sac is extended or Ident Road is extended, the cul-de-sac shall be eliminated . In other words it'll be straight. ve e-- Unintelligible 2 seconds - Mr. Brown has property takes (unintelligible word) there's Weintraub: Right, That's right. Now I don't know if/any obligation, if the town has any obligation to do that It's in his deed but of coursel that's between wo private ,c tizens d I didn't �e ' `�e he l d love have time to look into that 7�e,arrd�. to get bac sZj df the land in the ul-de-sac, but we're not asking for that. v/ p� W9024m .don't have the authority to do that. Dice.: unintelligible) better access this road behind which appears on -150 the town map lq� (unintelligible - 7 seconds ) it's marked as a present traveled road. (about 20 seconds unintelligible - zzxyxxnx several voices). With regards to the question of �C�,htt�.r►. right of way or property rights, you're saying it's objectionable to your client to have Mr. Kasheta acess through this route. Is that true? Is that part of it? Weintraub: It is objection ble because the present state that this has been left in,�the extentionA has been left in. Unintelligible - 3 seconds) . Warren: We have no question, no question about that. We're talking about the issue Unintelligible he portion of the property that is not Mr. Kasheta's, but it is necessary access from the' Unintelligible road unintelligible into fir. Kasheta's. The 75 feet (unintelligible). Weintraub: Again I'll repeat. This stub, if you can call the it that, were brought up to standards of the remainder of Ident enef' Mr. Brown at all Roa h ieh doesn't Qebd aor excepV o serve .tom if it's brought up to those standards, we have no problem . Warren: You talked about the condition of Mr. Kashet& not using the rear road (unintelligible 4 seconds). I assume you're talking in terms of his normal residential access to his house. Weintraub: That's right. Warren: Not in terms of farm equipment that may be brought (unintelligible). Weintraub: That's right. Warren: Unintelligible you do have permission to question Mr. Kasheta. -16- Erikkson: Where does he plan to put the house? Thrower Where does he plan to put the house? ' +- Excuse me. Could you makr the western boundary of Mr. Kasheta's property. Mu say it's 8 acres? Unidentified voice: Dead elm tree., Unintelligible - 1& seconds*) Lik 4 1'1 1 Oo s. n Warren: It does/include the lower shed or that water tower? - (Unititelligible,,,\ - "0 oY U-' S Eriksson: No town abutting roads? (End of tape). About 10 seconds unintelligible - 5 voices speaking at g � P once. Unidentified voice: Maybe Dusan knows where the house is. About 60 seconds unintelligible - several voices speaking Sax. Warren: Did you intend to do more work in this particular area? n� Ql4mitiall! Dice: Unintelligible word or two - graded, and a row of where my property starts we want to put/maple trees. It would serve as a boundary. WarreN: Unintelligible. 2 seconds ' —vvi-ee: 10 Unintelligible seconds g ( ) the trees will serve as a natural buffer. (unintelligible seconds) e About 15 seconds unintelligible. 0 If you see my property that the way it is now, where I live, I think you'll be able to judge the way the road will be when it gets to the house. (unintelligible 10 -17- Several voices - unintelligible - 8 seconds. 0 I Kmee: Immediately as soon as you leave the cul-de-sac you start going down and I 'd say it's a proximately (unintelligible - several words ) town property. 3+ vart unidentified voice: Unintelligible words -) first deep impression. : I'd like to clarify that. I know it'sas but a touchy situation firth Mr. Brown/when we were tructing in the fill at this point I gave (unintelligible word) and we both wkewent 4iEA in together t9 got this property surveyed, and knowing what (unintelligible ) was I just didn't want at that time (unintelligible) to antaganize him or cause further agag aggravation. But, you know, if this is his intent as I in the beginning wishes I will gladly/agreedto/ ynxxkmsnw, do an thing he wxxU that will r, ;4 satisfyhim and make sure 6 hisproperty. But, like I said, I thought at that time bringing in the dirt unintelligible three words) you know, would cause him antaganation. It would cause him aggravation and I didn't want to do this. Eriksson: Do you. .your plans are to (unintelligible) Kasheta: That is all (unintelligible) Eriksson; You're not going to bring it up to any level (unintelligible - 4 seconds) . Kasheta: No. No, Warren: Is it true that you're willing to maintain thaat portion . . . Kasheta: Yes. We have (unintelligible) where snow plowing C O W- Voice: Is there any (unintelligible). Unintelligible two or three words. Kasheta: /There is erosion . If fill is brought in it would cost me money , and I would make any effort, etery effort, to see, -18- ou kn w something permanent is don Sever 1 voices speaking at once - 1 seconds . Lclt ' tv ' '�C.�.- ���.o►� cam_ jqt Warren: Are there any more questions from the Board. Then we'll declare the public portion of thi closed. Transcript of portion of public hearing of Zoning Board of Appeals held on July 6, Kasheta, Jr. 1978, concerning application No. 1274-78, Edward W. Members present: Warren, Eriksson, Murrin Alternates Present: Earley (sitting for Cowles ) Warren: Next application is application 1274, Edward Kasheta, 95 Ident Road, requesting a variance to allow a building lot with less than the required frontage. Throwe: Chairman and members of the Zoning Board, my name is James Throwe and I live at 1330 Main Street in South Windsor, and I'm an attorney representing Edward and Susan Kasheta. You have this NBC map? Warren: Pieces of it. . (10 seconds unintelligible). Thrower This is an application by Mr. and Mrs. Kasheta for a variance. They presently own a house on Ident Road where they live. They have been deeded a parcel of land from Edward Kasheta, Sr. , which is at the very end of Ident Road, which was part of the Kasheta Farm, which has been handed down from father to son, to grandson, to great-grandson. This property from the Connecticut River out to Ellington Road was originally a colonial grant and it was, as far back as I can remember it, owned by one of the Stoughton families who ran a mill where my house is now located, and Eddie's great-grandfather, whose name was Peter Kasheta, worked for the Stoughtons as a hired hand, almost like an indentured servant, and through sheer work they ended up buying the farm from Stoughton. He handed it down to his son, Walter Kasheta, and when Walter died -2- the land was divided between the heirs of Walter, one of whom was Eddie Kasheta, Sr. , and he ended up with all the property from Main Street up to the land in back of Glendale Road, and not too long ago he gave a portion of that land to Ed. Jr. , and the intention was that he would develop that himself as a farm. The family has always been involved in farming even though the father has an outside job, and Eddie works for the Town of South Windsor. You can go up and down Main Street and see them raising tobacco, and various vegetables. He has a lovely home on Ident Road that he keeps up very well. I have a reap in my basement with an aerial photograph which shows a great big sand pit where his house is now, and you can see the grass and the shrubs and everything looks, like a doll house. When the town straightened out Ident Road, I have the original map, the intention was - there was an old trail that ran there - and they, the town took over and created the property (unintelligible word or two) road that is now Ident Road, and there was a proposed cul-de-sac right at the edge of that road (unintelligible word) land that is shown (unintelligible - two or three words). That cul-de-sac is shown on the town map is not where it presently exists. It exists about 50 feet up the road, directly in front of (unintelligible), So the road itself, going into Kasheta land would be a driveway that would connect with the cul-de-sac that presently exists. His property abuts the 50 foot right of way of the road called Ident Road, so the only frontage he has on Ident Road is that 50 feet, although he has land on both sides of it and if the cul-de-sac were built the way cul-de-sacs are supposed to be built, he might have the appropriate curbial lineage for frontage, but they didn9t. -3- They left it with a stub and it iw shown on the snap here and that's the 50 foot stub. Now, he has a requirement (unintelligible word) 400000 sq. ft. , and he has several acres. What he wishes to do with the property is to build a homestead on it, and to farm it the same as his father farms land that he has and then when he builds his own home he would sell the one he lives in and move into it and live in it himself. The property, part of it is in the wetlands, not where he intends to build, but part of it that curves around the back where there's a brook that meanders through there called Stoughton Brook, and, so he would have to go to the Inland-Wetlands and get approval from them, if this Board, this Commission grants this variance. I don't see too much problem since most of the land is very high and dry. It's one of the highest points along this ridge that runs almost right along Ident Road then comes - feather out when you get down near the south (unintelligible word) near the Pratt- Whitney plant. There is a definite hardship here because of the large piece of property abuts a road that ends in a stub and was constructed by the Town of South Windsor and was not created. It was there. There is no other way of getting out to any street. There is a road that goes across Stoughton Brook, that goes through other property and that road is not passable at all times. It's extremely long, it's several thousand feet long. This property, all he would need would be a driveway. It would go into his main house and garage, and the only other building he would have would be, there are some existing barns on the property that he would continue to use, The Commission, in its wisdom, has in the past granted similar applications. -4- Where was one, I think, on Abby Road. There was the (unintelligible) farm off Deming Street and one other. All similar situations where there were large pieces of land, left over from old f arms, and the person desired to keep the property intact and continue farming and that's what Eddie Kasheta wants to do. He wants to have something he can live in until his old age. There are some neighbors from the area who .wish to speak in favor of it and I have some letters from, some of the residents on Ident Road who were unable to attend but have furnished Mr. and Mrs. Kasheta with letters concerning their feelings in the matter. I have one from Mr. and Mrs. Bitgood, Fred Bitgood, at 110 Ident Road, who said they have no objections to the request of Mr. and Mrs. Edward Kasheta to build a home at the end of Ident Road and they favor it. I have one from Mary LeBlanc of 96 Ident Road, who says she finds no objections to the variance of Edward Kasheta, Jr. , allowing him to build a house on his property at the end of Ident Road. I have one from the Maskel Construction Company, which is the abutting owner on the east, saying they feel the building of a house at the end of Ident Road by Edward Kasheta does not reduce the value of our property. It is our feeling that this building will increase the value of our property. It's signed by Herman Rosen of the Maskel Construction Company. I don't want to take up all your time, but this is extremely important to Edward Kasheta and his wife. He has always been tied to this area. He farms and he farms actively. He knows brow to take care of the land. (unintelligible word) having problems with the (unintelligible - six or eight words) with the Town of South Windsor. This Board would have the opportunity to help him preserve --5- this land at the end of Ident Road because the alternatives that exist on some of this land are for someone to go in and build a small sub-division, That's not what he's trying or intends to do. This property that backs up to me, they wanted to build a sub-division several years ago. That never went through. That's right in back of his present home. (Tape ended). this general area. There are some lovely residential homes which have been built in the last ten years. His home would be back up off of fain Street and would be a benefit to both fain Street and to the Ident Road area. As you know, Ident Road is a precarious area because at the end of Ident Road we have some industrial buildings and as you came into the wooded section of Ident Road there are some very nice single family homes which were built not too long ago. Every time you get an opportunity to improve the site such as would be done with a residential home and small farm, I think it's a benefit to the town and helps to create an effective buffer between commercial and industrial zones and residential area. There is a fairly narrow strip along Alain Street and abutting streets. I see no question that there definitely exists hardship that prevents him from using this land, rural-residential land, and it's intended use is completely in keeping with the area and the sentiments of the neighbors who have voiced themselves in writing, and those who are here personally. Eddie Kasheta and his wife, Susan are both here and are ready and willing to answer any questions. Thank you. -6- Warren: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of this appeal? Yes? Rinaldie My name is Anthony M. Rinaldi. I live at 80 Ident Road and I do not object to it. In fact, I assure you they keep their land up very nicely and it will bring the value of our property up also. Warren: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of this appeal. Lojsim: My name is Jerry Lojzim. I live at 119 Ident Road. I'm accompanied by my wife, Ann. We're the next to the last house on Ident Road. Eddie's house certainly is an asset to our street. I am very much in favor of large tracts of land. I believe that what he is trying to do will be an asset to our area. We do not object and would like to see this variance granted. Warren: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor? Vibertt I'm Joseph Vi.bert, 1254 Main Street and my wife and I would like to go on record as being in favor of this application. At the present time this seems to be a no man's land, in that many bikes, motor bikes, snowmobiles, etc. , can come in at the end of Ident Road, cross this property, then go in the woods in back of our property and come out on Governor's Highway. We sit on our back porch on a summer's night like tonight and the motorcycles just grind away back and forth, back and forth. Where if there was a residence here, this would be controlled pretty well. I'm not saying that Kashetas would stop it completely, but at least with a house there, I'm quite sure it would automatically be controlled -7- without any cost to the town or to the other property owners in the area. So. I think it would be very beneficial to Main Street in this respect, plus ,it would create a good, sure buffer zone between the industrial zone and the fain Street residential zone. I have a small map here showing our property. This is Main Street. .this is (voice faded - 5 seconds unintelligible). Warren: The drive oomes up here . . .access to the motorcycles? Vibert: The side road's here. Motorcycles come across here, and this is all wooded. They go across here and out on Governor's Highway (5 seconds unintelligible). Warren: Thank you. Vibert: Thank you. Warren: Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of this appeal? Is there anyone who would like to speak in Apposition? Weintraub: Yes. My name is J. Weintraub. I'm a partner in the law firm of Rome and Case in Bloomfield, and I•m here tonight on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Dennis Brown of 131 Ident Road. If you will look at the map that was filed with the application, you will find Mr. Brown's property is just to the north of the property in question. Warren: (Unintelligible - about 2 seconds). Weintraub: That's correct. It's just to the north of the property in question and west of Ident Road. I believe on that map there's a little boa here that says 2F. I want to be sure you know what I'm talking about. It's going to be hard not to sound un-American, opposing an application on property with all that tradition in back of you - wanting to farm, and so forth, so I want a8- to clarify it. I don't want to actually oppose the application so much as to qualify it or attempt to condition it. I'd like to point out, if I could, that we're talking about a variance of a frontage requirement from 150 feet to 50 feet, if I'm not mistaken. That's frontage on a street. Now, your Zoning regulations define a street in Section 1.19b to mean a road or street andimproved to a degree of traffic safety and which will handle storm water ade- quately. Now, if I can just go back and go over some of the events that occurred the past year regarding the property in question and Mr. Brown's property, I think I can tie it in with some of the problems we have on definition of frontage and street. As it was pointed out, the cul-de-sac did not really and abutting Mr. Kasheta's property, but therels a little stem, and it's the stem that's caused the problems there the past year. The property was conveyed to Mr. Kasheta approximately one year ago, and shortly thereafter for several days Mr. Kasheta brogght in some equipment, a bulldozer, whatever, and proceeded to fill in where that stem is and the immediate area. Unfortunately, the bulldozer, and I'm not trying to imply by any means for purposes of our discussion here that there was any intention or maliciousness khere, but the bulldozer did cross over Mr. Brown's property at the corner. I believe there were a couple of beech trees that were killed in the process. In addition, there was quite a bit of fill that was either brought in or pushed on Mr. Brown's property. It never was pointed out there were some discussions that there was a tresepass, and I'm not sure it's been entirely resolved. Again, I'm not, I don't want to imply there was any intention, it probably was a mistake, but there were some trees that were killed and the fill that was brought in, I think is causing some other beech trees to die. Mr. Brown has contacted Mr. O'Brian of the M. Paul Tree Expert Co. , I believe they're here in South Windsor, and Mr. O'Brian has pointed out that some of these beech trees including a 19 inch beech tree and one is over 20 inches, is dying because of the fill. I guess it crushed the roots or something of that sort. I'm not an expert myself, I'm not in that field, but he did point out they're dying because of the fill that was brought in. He's tried to feed these trees and do something to make them. live. I'm not sure what the outcome will be. In addition to problems with the trees, there wave some depressions that were left. The depressions in the soil, one of them is actually on Mr. Brown's property. Another depression is approxi- mately between the stub, the extention of Ident Road, and Mr. Brown's property. Again, these depressions, when there is rainfall, will fill up with water and there's no run-off from them. It just sits there until it seeps into the (unintelligible - one word). Now, Mr. Brown has had some expense and some continuing problems as a result. One is the dying trees. He had to have a survey done to establish where his lines were. It cost him over a hundred dollars. The tree expert cost him another hundred dollars. He had some pipes he brought in to try to take the water from the depression on his property off his property. That's another $50. There's legal expense over this and there's some erosion also, *hat wasn't -10- occurring before. If you can imagine again, Mr, Brown's property at that corner sloping down and then several feet, maybe as much as 10-12 feet, I'm not certain, of fill being brought in and leaving depressions, just dirt, there's going to be erosion if there's no precautions or if nothing else being done to prevent this. Again, I'm pointing this out not to oppose the variance. We're not objecting that there be a house on that property. I think it's very commendable that there be just one house on eight acres rather than jamming in as many as you can get and so forth, but we want to insure that Mr. Brown's safety and health is also protected and the integrity of his private land is also protected. And, I don't believe it is as things stand right now with the extention of Ident Road in the condition that it's in. I was out there today myself. I walked that extention and it's a severe drop from the cul-de-sac. It's mud. It's not what I would call a street as used in your zoning regulations. As a matter of fact, I understand that when it gets *oo wet, it's necessary, and I think fir, Kasheta has found it necessary to use the road in back. That dirt road was pointed out to you, I believe. So, we have a situation where there are cars and trucks going in front of Mr. Brown's house and in back of us house at various times. What we would like to see, and perhaps we could have some agreement tonight from Mr. Kasheta, and we would like to have conditions imposed on granting the variance as follows : First, the extention of Ident Road beyond the cul-de-sac to the boundary of Mr. Kasheta's land is finished and conforms to the width and construction specifications of the rest of Ident Road, Second, is that proper drainage be installed to meet the standards of whatever the State public safety codes might apply. This drainage will insure wllw the extention of Ident Road will not wash away which again I've been told it has, that no erosion of Mr. Brown's property abutting Ident Road will occur and that the drainage ensure that the depression there presently existing not be allowed to fill up with water without some drainage being provided to carry away that water. And, the last condition that we ask for, is third, that Mr. Kasheta agree not as an alternative route, to use the road in back of Mr. Brown's house, so that he is not literally surrounded by vehicles in both front and back of his house. In conclusion (unintelligible - 2 or 3 seconds) the preamble of the Zoning Regulations that the purpose of the regulations is to promote health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community; that's all I'm asking you to consider is Mr. Brown's safety and health, if you grant this variance. And, I think the only way to do that is to impose the conditions that I suggested and I would also ask you that before you make a final decision, to please go out and take a look at this stub, because it is not a street as any of you think of a street or a street that can be used on any regular basis. There will be continual problems if nothing more is done and it is not brought up to standards of the rest of Ident Road. Otherwise, Mr. Brown has no objections to Mr. Kasheta being his neighbor, to putting a nice house in the back there, preserving the integrity of the neighborhood (unintelligible) and so forth. But, I think some provision has to be made to insure that the access is brought up to some standard along with the rest of the streets in town. Warren: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like -12- to speak:in opposition? Is there anyone else who would like to speak? Throwe: I 'd like to say a few words in rebuttal. Warren: I don't know about rebuttal, but we'll give you a chance to talk to us if you like. Throwe: I just would like to object to raising the question of what was done concerning the road that's a town road, and the improvements that were made to that town road were made by Mr. Kasheta, by authority of the town, with the permission of the town, so he could get into his property so the town avoided the cost of it. I had some discussions with Mr. Weintraub's law firm about the claimed damage, and we offered to pay for certain expenses that they incurred, and we never heard again until this application. I don't think this is the proper forum to discuss it. It's something that's not involved with this particular petition. What they're objecting to is his improving a town road. The conditions they're asking for, they're asking him to improve a town road. How he gets into his property and what he does to a portion of the land that belongs to the Town of South Windsor, that's who owns it. They owned it as a road and it goes right up to the property that was formerly Walter and Mary Kasheta and it's now his, is between him and the Town, What they want to do, and what they want him to do. His intention is not to build a highway in there. His intention is to put a driveway in that will go into his property. This is the same as the house that Cody built on the end of Palmer Drive that Bob Sheridan just bought and other properties in the town. I think those questions, it seems to me there really isn't a question, about the use of this particular property, but only the probjems that existed with that cul-de-sac since Ident Road was changed from a farm road 13- to a half-way straight road. The right of way, the use of the land behind Mr. Brown's is Kasheta's land that Kasheta rents from its owner, Joseph (unintelligible), and there's a farm road in there he's entitled to use it. It has nothing to do with this property or the other property. It's land that Joe (Unintelligible) rents out for farming and this year he happens to be renting it to the Kashetas to grow crops on it. There's a dirt road that exists on that farm land. I can't add anything to it except what Joe Vibert said about the motor bikes (unintelligible - 2-3 seconds ) . Warren: We'll have questions from the Board. I'm not sure I understand the whole situation. I'm a little bit confused over what seems to be a kind of paradoxical problem. The objections to the fill and the objections to the depression. If, for example, there was additional fill put in that would mean more problems with the trees. If the depression is left it will collect water. How do you resolve that kind of problem? Is this a problem a normal engineer could handle? Meintraubs I really don't know. The depression right now, there are no trees growing out of the depression so I would guess if more fill were brought in to fill the depression in it would not kill any more trees. Marren: Okay. The additional fill would be, might be an acceptable solution and that fill would go (unintelligible) property or Mr. Browns property? Weintraub: I think some of it is Mr. Brown's property. As I indicated, initially fill was placed on Mr. Brown's property (unintelligible) and leaving a depression on his property. Also a depression between the nub, the extention of Ident Road going into Mr• Brown's property. -14- Warren: (Unintelligible - about 4 seconds). Weintraub: Yes. Warren: (Unintelligible - 2 seconds) Weintraub: Well, no. It's between the extention of Ident. Not the terminus, but the side of the extention and Mr. Brown's property. Warrens So it's on town property? Weintraub: Probably. Warren: Not as far as the current filled driveway that Mr. Kasheta has? Weintraub: That's right. Then that's the second depression that I'm referring to. It probably could be just filled in. Again, I don't know much about drainage, but it is collecting water. It is causing erosion from Mr. Brown's property as well as eventually, I would imagine, from the road itself. Mr. Brown indicates to me, I think, there was (unintelligible word) partially wiped out and more fill had to be brought in. I think it really needs some improvement. I'm not suggesting a highway. Mr. Brown wouldn't even want that. He'd like to keep the rural nature of the property. They want a road there that's going to stay. That's not going to wash away (unintelligible - about 2 seconds) erosion. Erode away, cuts away his property where it ends or abuts the roadway. (unintelligible - about 2 seconds ) . Warren: Do you know how it occurred that the. . . .that the paved town right-of-way ended right at Mr. Brown's property instead of Mr. Kasheta's property? Weintraub: I do not know that. I do know that Mr. Brown's -15- and I only found out about this yesterday so I didn't have time to look further, in his deed there is some indication and I do not know what the town's obligation is, but when the cul-de-sac is extended or Ident Road is extended, the cul-de-sac shall be eliminated. In other words, it'll be straight. Warren: (unintelligible - 2 seconds) Mr. Brown has property taxes (unintelligible word) . Weintraub: Right, that's right. Now I don' t know if there's any obligation, if the town has any obligation to do that, It's in his deed, but, of course, that's between two private citizens, and I didn't have time to look into that to be honest with you. Of course, he'd love to get back some of the land in the cul-de-sac, but we're not asking for that (unintelligible word). Unidentified voice: (Unintelligible) don't have the authority to do that. (Unintelligible) better access this road behind which appears on the town map (unintelligible - 7 seconds) it's marked as a present travelled road (about 20 seconds - unintelligible - several voices speaking), Warren: With regards to the question of right of way or property rights, you're saying it's objectionable to your client to have fir. Kasheta access through this route. Is that true? Is that part of it? Weintraub: It's objectionable because of the present state that this has been left in that the extantion of Ident has been left in, (Unintelligible - 3 seconds). Warren: We have no question, no question about that. We're talking about the issue (unintelligible) the portion of the property that is not fir. Kasheta's# but it is necessary access from the -16- (unintelligible) road (unintelligible) into Mr. Kasheta's. The 75 feet (unintelligible). Weintraub: Again, I'll repeat. This stub, if you can call it that, were brought up to the standards of the remainder of Ident Road, with proper drainage, which doesn't benefit Mr. Brown at A111 except again to serve his land which abuts it, if it's brought up to those standards, we have no problem. Warren: You talked about the condition of fir. Kasheta's not using the rear road (unintelligible - 4 seconds). I assume you're talking in terms of his normal residential access to his house? Weintraub: That's right. Warren: Not in terms of farm equipment that may be brought (unintelligible) . Weintraub : That's right. Warren: (unintelligible) you do have permission to question Mr. Kasheta. Eriksson: Where does he plan to put, the house? Thrower Where does h6 plan to put the house? Warren: Excuse me, Could you mark the western boundary of Mr. Kasheta's property. You say it's 8 acres? Unidentified voice: Dead elm tree. (Unintelligible - 16 seconds ) Warren: It doesn't include the lower shed or that old water tower? (Unintelligible - 25 seconds - several voices speaking at once). Eriksson: No town abutting roads? (End of tape). _1?_ (About 10 seconds - unintelligible - several voices speaking at once). Unidentified voice: Maybe Susan knows where the house is. (About 60 seconds unintelligible - several voices speaking at once). Warren: Did you intend to do more work in this particular area? Kasheta: (Unintelligible - word or two) graded, and where my property starts we want to put a row of maple trees. It would serve as a boundary. Warren: (unintelligible - about 2 seconds) Kasheta: (Unintelligible - 10 seconds) The trees will serve as a natural buffer (unintelligible - 25 seconds)* (15 seconds - unintelligible) Kasheta: If you see my property that the way it is now, where I live, I think you'll be able to judge the way the road will be when it gets to the house (unintelligible - 10 seconds). (Several voices - unintelligible - 8 seconds) Kasheta: Immediately as soon as you leave the cul-de-sac you start going down, and I'd say it's approxiVately (unintelligible) town property. (Unintelligible). Unidentified voice: (Unintelligible - several words) first deep impression. Kasheta: I'd like to clarify that. I know it was a touchy situation with Mr. Brown but when we were trucking in the fill at this point I gave (unintelligible word) and we both went in together after this property was surveyed, and knowing what (unintelligible) was I just didn't want at that time (unintelligible) to antaganise him or cause further aggravation. But, youlknow, if this is his intent, I will gladly, as I agreed to in the beginning, do anything he wishes that will satisfy him and make sure of the well- being of his property. But, like I said, I thought at that time bringing in the dirt (unintelligible - three words ) you know, would cause him antaganation. Antaganation? Excuse me. It would cause him aggravation and I didn't want to do this. Eriksson: Do you. . . * your plans are to (unintelligible) . Kasheta: That is all (unintelligible). Eriksson: You're not going to bring it up to any level (unintelligible - 4 seconds). Kasheta: No, no. Warren: Is it true that you're willing to maintain that portion. . . Kasheta: Yes. We have (unintelligible) where snow plowing (unintelligible ). Unidentified voices Is there any (unintelligible) drainage? Kasheta: (Unintelligible - two or three words) . There is erosion. If fill is brought in it would cost me money, and I would make any effort, every effort, to see, you know, something permanefat is done (unintelligible - 10 seconds). I want to ensure (unintelli- gible - several voices speaking at once - 15 seconds ). Eriksson: May I also suggest the Wetlands Agency will have something to say about what he can and can' t put in and they're the ones that are really in a position to discuss what (unintelligible). Weintraub: (Unintelligible - 10 seconds). Warren: Are there any more questions from the Board? Then we'll declare the public portion of this closed. �OV114 SF.t CO) E" 0/ lJ��• O � v 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE - SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 R co��w AREA CODE 203 f 644-2511 I hereby certify that to the best of my ability this is a true and accurate verbatim transcript of the public hearing held on July 69 1978, concerning the application, No. 1274-78,of Edward W. Kasheta, Jr. requesting a variance of Article 5.2, Section 5, to allow a building lot with less than the required frontage on premises known as Kasheta Farm, Zone A-40. Virgillia S. radeys Secret Zoning Board of Appeals l Transcript of portion of public hearing of Zoning Board of Appeals held on July 6, 1978, concerning application No. 1274-78, Edward W. Kasheta, Jr. Members presents Warren, Eriksson, Murrin Alternates Present: Earley (sitting for Cowles ) Warren: Next application is application 1274, Edward Kasheta, 95 Ident Road, requesting a variance to 'allow a building lot with less than the required frontage. Throwe: Chairman and members of the Zoning Board, my name is James Throwe and I live at 1330 Vain Street in South Windsor, and I'm an attorney representing Edward and .Susan. Kasheta. You have this NBC map? Warren: Pieces of it. . (10 seconds unintelligible). Throwe: This is an application by NTr. and Mrs. Kasheta } for a variance. They presently own a house on Ident Road where they live. They have been deeded a parcel of land from Edward Kasheta, Sr. , which is at the very end of Ident Road, which was part of the Kasheta Farm, which has been handed down from father to son, to grandson, to great-grandson. This property from the Connecticut River out to Ellington Road was originally a colonial grant and it was, as far back as I can remember it, owned by one of the Stoughton families who ran a mill where my house is now located, and Eddie's great-grandfather, whose name was Peter Kasheta, worked for the Stoughtons as a hired hand, almost like an indentured servant, and through sheer work they ended up buying the farm from Stoughton. He handed it down to his son, Walter Kasheta, and when Walter died -2- the land was divided between the heirs of Walter, one of whom was Eddie Kasheta, Sr. , and he ended up with all the property from Main Street up to the land in back of Glendale Road, and not too long ago he gave a portion of that land to Ed, Jr. , and the intention was that he would develop that himself as a farm. The family has always been involved in farming even though the father has an outside job, and Eddie works for the Town of South Windsor. You can go up and down ruin Street and see them raising tobacco, and various vegetables. He has a lovely home on Ident Road that he keeps up very well. I have a map in my basement with an aerial photograph which shows a great big sand pit where his house is now, and you can see the grass and the shrubs and everything looks like a doll house. When the town straightened out Ident Road, I have the original map, the intention was - there was an old trail that ran there - and they, the town took over and created the property (unintelligible word or two) road that is now Ident Road, and there was a proposed cul-de-sac right at the edge of that road (unintelligible word) land that is shown (unintelligible - two or three words). That cul-de-sac is shown on the town map is not where it presently exists. It exists about 50 feet up the road, directly in front of (unintelligible). So the road itself , going into Kasheta land would be a driveway that would connect with the cul-de-sac that presently exists. His property abuts the 50 foot right of way of the road called Ident Road, so the only frontage he has on Ident Road is that 50 feet, although he has land on both sides of it and if the cul-de-sac were built the way cul-de-sacs are supposed to be built, he might have the appropriate curbial lineage for frontage, but they didn't. -3- They left it with a stub and it is shown on the map here and that's the 50 foot stub. Now, he has a requirement (unintelligible word) ord) 40,000 sq. ft. , and he has several acres. What he wishes to do with the property is to build a homestead on it, and to farm it the same as his father farms land that he has and then when he buil ds his own home he would sell the one he lives in and move into it and live in it himself. The property, part of it is in the wetlands no t t where he intends to build, but part of it that curves around the back where there's a brook that meanders through there called Stoughton Brook, and, so he would have to go to the Inland-Wetlands and get approval from them, if this Board, this Commission grants this variance. I don't see too much problem since most of the land is very high and dry. It's one of the highest points along this ridge that runs almost right along Ident Road then comes - feather out when you get down near the south (unintelligible word) near the Pratt rVhitney plant. There is a definite hardship here because of the large piece of property abuts a road that ends in a stub and was constructed by the Town of South Windsor and was not created. It was ther e. There is no other way of getting out to any street. There is a ro ad that goes across Stoughton Brook, that goes through other property and,,that road is not passable at all times. It's extreme? long �` y it's several thousand feet long. This property, all he would need would be a driveway. It would go into his main house and garage, g and the only other building he would have would be, there are some existing barns on the property that he would continue to use, The Commission, in its wisdom, has in the past granted similar applications. was one �4r There �s I think, on Abby Road. There was the (unintelligible) farm off Deming Street and one other. All similar situations where there were large pieces of land, left over from old f arms, an d the person desired to keep the property intact and continue farming rming and that's what Eddie Kasheta wants to do. He wants .to have something he can live in until his old age. There are some neighbors from the area who .wish to speak in favor of it and I have some letters from some of the residents on Ident Road who were unable to attend but have furnished Mr. and Pairs. Kasheta with letters concerning cernin their feelings in the matter. I have one from Mr. and Mrs* g Bit ood, Fred Bitgood, at 110 Ident Road, who said they have no objections to the request of Mr. and Mrs. Edward Kasheta to build a home at the end of Ident Road and they favor it. I have one from Nia,ry LeBlanc of 96 Ident Road, who says she finds no objections to the variance of Edward Kasheta, Jr. , allowing him to build a house on his property at the end of Ident Road. I have one from the Naskel Const ruction Company, which is the abutting owner on the east, saying y n the feel the building of a house at the end of Ident Road b Edward Kasheta does not reduce the value of our property. It is our feeling that this building will increase the va lue of our property. It's signed by Herman Rosen of the Maskel Construction Company, I don't want to take up all your time, but this is extremely important to Edward Kasheta and his wife. He has - always been tied to this area. He farms and he farms actively. He knows how to take care of the land. (unintelligible word) having problems with the unintelligible - six or eight words) with the Town of South Windsor. This Board would have the opportunity to help him preserve this land at the end of Ident Road because the alternatives that exist on some of this land are for someone to go in and build a small sub-division. That's not what he's trying or intends to do. This property that backs up to me, they wanted to build a sub-division several years ago. That never went through. That's right in back of his present home. Nape ended)* this general area. There are some lovely residential homes which have been built in the last ten years. His home would be back up off of Main Street and would be a benefit to both Main Street and to the Ident Road area. As you know, Ident Road is a precarious area because at the and of Ident Road we have some industrial buildings and as you come into the wooded section of Ident Road there are some very nice single family homes which were built not too long ago. Every time you get an opportunity to improve the site such as would be done with a residential home and small farm, I think it's a benefit to the town and helps to create an effective buffer between commercial and industrial zones and residential area. There is. a fairly narrow strip along fain Street and abutting streets. I see no question that there definitely exists hardship that prevents him from using this land, rural-residential land, and it's intended use is completely in keeping with the area and the sentiments of the neighbors who have voiced themselves in writing, and those who are here personally. Eddie Kasheta and his wife, Susan are both here and are ready and willing to answer any questions. Thank you. _6_ Warren: Is there anyone who would like to speak in f avor of this appeal? Yes? Rinaldi: My name is Anthony M. Rinaldo,. I live at 80 Ident Road and I do not object to it. In fact, I assure you they keep their land up very nicely and it will bring the value of our property up also. Warren: Thank you. Is there anyone else who° would like to speak in favor of this appeal. Lo 'Jzim: My name is Jerry Lojzim. I live at 119 Ident Road. I'm accompanied by my wife, Anna We're the next to the la st house on Ident Road. Eddie's house certainly is an asset to our str eet, I am very much in favor of large tracts of land. I believe that what he is trying to do will be an asset to our area. We do not object and would like to see this variance granted. Warren: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor? Vibert: Itm Joseph Vibert, 1254 Main Street and my wife and I would like to go on record as being in favor of this aPp lication. At the present time this seems to be a no man's land, in that many bikes, motor bikes, snowmobiles, . etc. , can come in at the end of Ident Road, cross this property, then go in the woods in back of property f ro erty and come out on .Governor's Highway. We sit on our back porch on a summer's night like tonight .and the motorcycles just grind away back and forth, back and forth. Where if there was a residence here, this would be controlled pretty well. Ism not saying that Kashetas would stop it completely, but at least with a house there. I'm quite sure it would automatically be controlled. ..7- without any cost to the town or to the other property owners in the area. So. I think it would be very beneficial to Main Street in this respect, plus it would create a good, sure buffer zone between the industrial zone and the Main Street residential zone. I have a small map here showing our property. This is Main Street. .this is (voice faded - 5 seconds unintelligible). Warrens The drive domes up here . . .access to the motorcycles? Viberts The side .road's here. Motorcycles come across here, and this is all wooded. They go across here and out on Governor's Highway (5 seconds unintelligible). Warrens Thank you. Vibert s Thank you. Warrens Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of this appeal? Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition? Weintraubs Yes. My name is J. Weintraub. I'm a partner in the law farm of Rome and Case in Bloomfield, and I'm here tonight on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Dennis Brown of 131 Ident Road. If you will look at the map that was filed with the application, you will find Mr. Browns property is just to the north of the property in question. Warren: (Unintelligible - about 2 seconds). Weintraubs That's correct. It's just to the north of the property in question and west of Ident Road. I believe on that map there's a little box here that says 2F. I want to be sure you know what I'm talking about. It's going to be hard not to sound un-American, opposing an application on property with all that tradition in back of you - wanting to farm, and so forth, so I want -8- to clarify it. I don't want to actually oppose the application so much as to qualify it or attempt to condition it. I'd like to point out, if I could, that we're talking about a variance of a frontage requirement from 150 feet to 50 feet, if I'm not mistaken. That•s frontage on a street. Now, your Zoning regulations define a street in Section 1.19b to mean a road or street andimproved to a degree of traffic safety and which will handle storm water ade- quately. Now, if I can just go back and go over some of the events that occurred the past year regarding the property in question and Mr. Brown's .property, I think I can tie it in with some of the problems we have on definition of frontage and street. As it was pointed out, the cul-de-sac did not really end abutting Mr. Kasheta's property, but there's a little stem, and it's the stem that's caused the problems there the past year. The property was conveyed to Mr. Kasheta approximately one year ago, and shortly thereafter for P several days Mr. Kasheta brought in some equipment, a bulldozer, whatever, and proceeded to fill in where that stem is and the immediate area. Unfortunately, the bulldozer, and I'm not trying to imply by any means for purposes of our discussion here that there was any intention or maliciousness there, but the bulldozer did cross over Mr. Brown's property at the corner. I believe there were a couple of beech trees that were killed in the process. In addition, there was quite a bit of fill that was either brought in or pushed on Mr. Brown's property. It never was pointed out there were some discussions that there was a tresspass, and I'm not sure it's been entirely resolved. Again, I'm not, I don't want to imply there was _9- any intention, it probably was a mistake, but there were some trees that were killed and the fill that was brought in, I think is causing some other beech trees to die. Mr. Brown has contacted Aix. O'Brian of the M. Paul Tree Expert Co. , I believe they're here in South Windsor, and Mr. O'Brian has pointed out that some of these beech trees including a 19 inch beech tree and one is over 20 inches, is dying because of the fill. I guess it crushed the roots or something of that sort. I'm not an expert myself, I'm not in that field, but he did point out they're dying because of the fill that was brought in. He's tried to feed these trees and do something to make them live. I'm not sure what the outcome will be. In addition to problems with the trees, there were some depressions that were left. The depressions in the soil, . one of them is actually on Y1r. Brown's property. Another depression is approxi- mately between the stub, the extention of Ident Road, and Mr. Brown's property. Again, these depressions, when there is rainfall, will fill up with water and there's no run-off from them. It just sits there until it seeps into the (unintelligible - one word). Now, Mr. Brown has had some expense and some continuing problems as a result. One is the dying trees. He had to have a survey done to establish where his lines were. It cost him over a hundred dollars. The tree expert cost him another hundred dollars. He had some pipes he brought in to try to take the water from the depression on his property off his property. Tha.t'. another $50. There's legal expense over this and there's some erosion also, that wasn't w 1 0 w occurring before. If you can imagine again, Mr. Brown's property at that corner sloping down and then several feet, maybe as much as 10--12 feet, I'm not certain, of fill being brought in and leaving depressions, just dirt, there's going to be erosion if there's no precautions or if nothing else being done to prevent this. Again, I'm pointing this out not to oppose the variance. We're not objecting that there be a house on that property. I think it's very commendable that there be just one house on eight acres rather than jamming in as many as you can get and so forth, but we want to insure that Per. Brown's safety and health is also protected and the integrity of his private land is also protected. And, I don't believe it is as things stand right now with the extention of Ident Road in the condition that it's in. I was out there today myself. I walked that extention and it's a severe drop from the cul-de-sac. It's mud. It's not what I would call a street as rused in your zoning regulations. As a matter of fact, I understand that when it gets too wet, it's necessary, and I think Mr. Kasheta has found it necessary to use the road in back. That dirt road was pointed out to you, I believe. So, we have a situation where there are cars and trucks going in front of Mr. Brown's house and in back of us house at various times. What we would like to see, and perhaps we could have some agreement tonight from Mr. Kasheta, and we would like to have conditions imposed on granting th-e variance as follows : First, the extention of Ident Road beyond the cul-de-sac to the boundary of Mr. Kasheta's land is finished and conforms to the width and construction specifications of the rest of Ident Road. Second, is that proper drainage be installed to meet the standards .of whatever the State public safety codes might apply. This drainage will insure -11- the extention of Ident Road will .not wash away which again I've been told it has, that no erosion of Mr. Brown's property abutting Ident Road will occur and that the drainage ensure that the depression there presently existing not be allowed to f ill .up with water without some drainage being provided to carry away that water. And, the last condition that we ask for, is third, that Mr. Kasheta agree not as an alternative route, to use the road in back of Mr, Brown's house, so that he is not literally surrounded by vehicles in both front and back of his house. In conclusion (unintelligible - 2 or 3 seconds) the preamble of the Zoning Regulations that the purpose of the regulations is to promote health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community; that's all I'm asking you to consider is Mr. Brown's safety and health, if you grant this variance. And, I think the only way to do that is to impose the conditions that I suggested and I would also ask you that before you make a final decision, to p g lease o out and take a look at this stub, because it is not a street as any of you think of a street or a street that can be used on any regular basis. There will be continual problems if nothing more is done and it is not brought up to standards of the rest,,lof Ident Road, Otherwise, Mr. Brown has no objections to Mr. Kasheta being his neighbor, to putting a nice house in the back t , preserving reserving the integrity of the neighborhood (unintelligible) and so forth. But, I think some provision has to be made to insure that the access is brought up to some standard along with the rest of the streets in town. Warren: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like _12_ to speak in opposition? Is there anyone else who would like to speak? Thrower I 'd like to say a few words in rebuttal. Warren: I don't know about rebuttal, but we'll give you a chance to talk to us if you like. Thrower I just would like to object to raising the question n of what was done concerning the road that's a town road, and the improvements that were made to that town road were made by Mr, Kasheta, by authority of the town, with the permission of the town so he could get into his property so the town avoided the cost of it. I had some discussions with Mr. Weintraub's law firm about the claimed damage, and we offered to pay for certain expenses that the Y incurred, and we never heard again until this application. I don't think this is the proper forum to discuss it. It's something that's not involved with this particular petition. What they're objecting to is his improving a town road. The conditions they're asking for, they're asking him to improve a town road. How he gets into his property and what he does to a portion of the land that belongs to the Town of South Windsor, that's who owns it. They owned it as a road and it goes right up to the property that was formerly Walter and Mary. Kasheta and it's now his, is between him and the Town, what they want to do, and what they want him to do. His in� tendon is not to build a highway in there. His intention is o t put a driveway in that will go into his property. This is the same as the house that Cody built on the end of Palmer Drive that Bob Sheridan just bought and other properties in the town. I think those questions, it seems to me there really isn't a question, about the use of this particular property, but only the problems that existed with that cul-de-sac since Ident Road was changed from a farm road -13- to a half-way straight road. The right of way, the use of the land behind Mr. Brown's is Kasheta's land that Kasheta rents from its owner, Joseph (unintelligible) , and there's a farm road in there he's entitled to use it. It has nothing to do with this property or the other property. It's land that Joe (Unintelligible) rents out for farming and this year he happens to be renting it -to the Kashetas to grow crops on it. There's a dirt road that exists on that farm land. I can't add anything to it except what Joe Vibert said about the motor bikes (unintelligible - 2-3 seconds) . Warrens We'll have questions from the Board. I'm not sure I understand the whole situation. I•m a little bit confused over what seems to be a kind of paradoxical problem. The objections to the fill and the objections to the depression. If, for example, there was additional fill put in that would mean. more problems with the trees. If the depression is left it will collect water. How do you resolve that kind of problem? Is this a problem a normal engineer could handle? Weintraub: I really don't know. The depression right now, there are no trees growing out of the depression so I would. guess if more fill were brought in to fill the depression in it would not kill any more trees. Warren: Okay. The additional fill would be, mi&ht be an acceptable solution and that fill would go (unintelligible) property or P+ir. Brown's property? Weintraub: I think some of it is Mr. Brown's property. As I indicated, initially fill 'was placed on Mr. Brown's property (unintelligible ) and .leavincy a depression on his property. Also a depression between the nub, the extention of Ident Road going into for• Brown's property. -14- Warren: (Unintelligible - about 4 seconds). weintraubs Yes. Warrens (Unintelligible - 2 seconds) V�'ell, no. It's between the extention of Idento vVe i ntraub s Not the terminus! but the side of the extention and Mr. Brown's property* Warren: So it's on town property? Weintraub s Probably. . warren: Not as far as the current filled driveway that i►r. Kasheta has? That's right. Then that's the second depression Weintraubs • It robably could be just filled in. Again, that I'm referring to. P bout drainage, but it is collecting water. It is I don't know much a causing erosion from Nr. Brown's property as well as eventually, from the road itself. Mr. Brown indicates to me, I would imagines I think, there was (unintelligible word) partially wiped out and more fill had to be brought in. I think it really needs some Mr. Brown wouldn't even improvement. I'm not suggesting a highway. want. that. Held like to keep the rural nature of the property. They want a road there that's going to stay. That's not going to ' ' onds) erosion. Erode away, wash away (unintelligible - about 2 sec cuts away. property roperty where it ends or abuts the roadway. (unintelligible - about 2 seconds ) , • Do ou know how it occurred that the• • . .that the Warren. y rig ht-of-way ended right at Mr. Brown's property paved town g instead of Mr. Kasheta's property? I do not know that. I do know that Mr. Brown's Weintraub: _15-' and I only found out about this yesterday so I didn't have time e to look further, in his deed there is some indication and. I do not kn ow what the town's obligation is, but when the cul-de-sac is extended or Ident Road is extended, the cul-de-sac shall be eliminated. iminated. In other words, it'll be straight. Warren: (unintelligible - 2 seconds) Mr. Brown h as .property taxes (unintelligible word) . Weintraub: Right, that's right. Now I don' t know 'if there's any obligation, if the town has any obligation to do that. It's in his deed, but, of course, that's between two private citizens, and I didn't have time to look into that to be honest with you. Of course, he''d love to get back some of the land in the cul-de-sac b . ut we're not asking for that (unintelligible word). Unidentified voice: (Unintelligible) don't have the ' autharlty to do that. (Unintelligible) better access this road behind which appears on the town map (unintelligible- 7 seconds) it's marked as a present travelled road (about 20 seconds - unintelligible - several voices speaking). Warren: With regards to the question of right of g way or property rights, you're saying it's objectionable to your client to have Mr. Kasheta access through this route. Is that true? Is that part of it? Weintraub : It's objectionable because of the r p esent state that this has been left in that the extention -of Ident has been left in. (Unintelligible - 3 seconds). Warren: We have no question, no question about that. We're talking about the issue (unintelligible) the portion of the property that is not Mr. Kasheta's, but it is necessary access from the e -16- (unintelligible) road (unintelligible) into Mr. Kasheta's. The 75 feet (unintelligible) . Weintraub: Again, I'll repeat. This stub, if you can call it that, were brought up to the standards of the remainder of Ident Road, with proper drainage, which doesn't benefit Mr. Brown at all except again to serve his land which abuts it, if it's brought up to those standards, we have no problem. Warren: You talked about the condition of Mr. Kasheta's not using the rear road (unintelligible- 4 seconds.,). I assume you're talking in terms of his normal residential access to his house? Weintraub: That's right. Warren: Not in terms of farm equipment that may be brought (unintelligible) . Weintraub : That's right. Warrens (unintelligible) you do have permission to question Mr. Kasheta. Eriksson: Where does he plan to put- the house? Throwe: Where does he plan to put the house? Warren: Excuse me, Could you mark the western boundary of Yx, Kasheta's property. You say it's 8 acres? Unidentified voice: Dead elm tree. (Unintelligible - 16 seconds ) Warren: It doesn't include the lower shed or that old water tower? (Unintelligible - 25 seconds - several voices speaking at once). Eriksson: No town abutting roads? (End of tape), F (About 10 seconds -- unintelligible - several voices speaking at once). Unidentified voice: Maybe Susan knows where the house is. R (About 60 seconds unintelligible - several voices speaking at once). Warren: Did you intend to do more work in this particular area? Kasheta: (Unintelligible - word or two) graded°, and where i my property starts we want to put a row of maple trees. It would k serve as a boundary. i Warrens (unintelligible - about 2 seconds) r j Kasheta: (Unintelligible - 10 seconds) The trees will serve as a natural buffer (unintelligible - 25 seconds ), (15 seconds - unintelligible) Kasheta: If you see my property that the way it is now, r where I live, I think you'll be able to judge the way the road will be when it gets to the house (unintelligible - 10 seconds). (Several voices - unintelligible - 8 seconds ) Kasheta: Immediately as soon as you leave the cul-de-sac you start going down, and I'd say it's approximately (unintelligible) town property. (Unintelligible) . Unidentified voice: (Unintelligible - several words) first deep impression. Kasheta: I'd like to clarify that. I know it was a touchy situation with Mr. Brown but when we were trucking in the fill at this point I gave (unintelligible word) and we both went in together. after this property was surveyed, and knowing what (unintelligible) was I just didntt want at that time (unintelligible) to antaganize ` him or cause further aggravation. But, you M know, if this is his intent, I will gladly, as I agreed to in the beginning, do anything he wishes that will satisfy him and make s ure .of the well- being of his property. But, like I said, I thought at that time bringing in the dirt (unintelligible - three words) you know, would cause him antaganation. Antaganation? Excuse me. It would cause him aggravation and I didn't want to do this. Eriksson: Do you. . . , your plans are to (unintelligible) . Kasheta: That is all (unintelligible). Eriksson: You're not going to bring it up to any level (unintelligible - 4 seconds). Kasheta: No, no. Warren: Is it true that you're willing to maintain that portion. Kasheta: Yes. We have (unintelligible) where snow plowing (unintelligible ) . Unidentified voice: Is there any (unintelligible) drainage? Kasheta: (Unintelligible - two or three words) . There is erosion. If fill is brought in it would cost me money, and I would make any effort, every effort, to see, you know, something permanent is done (unintelligible - 10 seconds). I want to ensure (unintelli- gible"- several voices speaking at once - 15 seconds ) . Eriksson: "ay I also suggest the Wetlands Agency will have something to say about what he can and can' t put in and they're the ones that are really in a position to discuss what (unintelligible). Weintraub : (Unintelligible - 10 seconds ). Warren: Are there any more questions from the Board? Then we'll declare the public portion of this closed. O'N NS-o-MiA ?dl�z� SFq O � s ' 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 _ v 0R-Co AREA CODE 203/644-2511 July 12, 1978 CERTIFIED MAIL Mr. Edward W. Ka.sheta, Jr. 95 Ident Road South Windsor, Conn. 06074 Dear Mr. Ka.sheta: RE: Application No. 12 74-78 Your application to the South Windsor Zoning Board of Appeals re- questing a variance of Article 5.2, Section 5, to allow a building lot ` with less than the required frontage on premises known as Kasheta Farm, Zone A-40, has been approved. The parcel in question has no frontage on an approved road other than the 50-foot section at the end of Ident Road. The property con- tains 8 acres and is intended to be used as one lot for one house. In order to make the best use of the land, the Board feels a variance of 100 feet at the front line is in order. The house will be located at least 50 feet west of an extension of Ident Road. In the event Ident Road is ever extended, this house will then be in conformance with the building regulations. The owner, not the Town of South Windsor, shall be responsible for all maintenance, including snowplowing, of the un- improved portion of Ident Road between the cul-de-sac and his property line. The Board, in granting this approval, refers the question of erosion and drainage to the Inland Wetlands Agency and the Planning and Zoning Commission and makes this approval contingent upon site plan approval. This action is effective July 19, 1978, and upon filing the enclosed form in the Town Clerk's Office. Sincerely yours, Robert W. Warren, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals Enclosure RICHARD M. RITTENBAND ATTORNEY AT LAW 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT 06074 AREA CODE.203 644-2456 July 25, 1978 Mrs. Virginia Graney Secretary, Zoning Board of Appeals 21 Greenfield Drive South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Dear Ginny: A Court appeal has been filed by Mr. and Mrs. Dennis R. Brown from the granting of a variance on July 6 , 1978 to Edward W. Kasheta, Jr. Will you kindly send me' 'four copies of the complete file on this matter, including application, publication of notice, minutes , transcript of Public Hearing, etc. , and any maps , on which the Zoning Board of Appeals based its decision. The return date is the fifth. Tuesday of August, so I should have the material no later than that date. Thank you. Very truly yours ,..._. Ric and M. Rittenband South Windsor Town Attorney RMR/ads A gmt 19. 19' RLahard *. Ri ttmba nd, ftq. 1?34 EllingtMRead South WiMsore C16 94 Dear Dick Re ZDA Application Kev 1274*48 mm" W. K"helat Jr. In s with your letter of July 25%ko, I he ►fth snaleme few Cam of U* gWdM geaft*r entire file In the aloe" mvt--# including the trameript of the public h-Mla ' q►g hold an July 6th. I1 ere is wqVdft s you no". plows lotsoknow,* angora * zenift Board of Appode ones. CCi Mr. Robert Wo ftrrev4 Cb&Lrmn 41 A 4 l� F QIle- A . A F, r, %� ;y ac GND Al h � ° � v h Ic .S► ac J y o y �, V. G n7 A c. SG 1'V7 �1'� w14tl 2 . 3�' A4ves a e(A S ��`/ a7 V j, 'F ell) ,�' `, h 1� s� , �I�l Q�Q• s`, 'ati /7 i /-� Lot Mcsf'tVL-f' s .�r"Nie- l 66 / 66 76 74 r c Blk 70 64 / r 7p jf / V 66 /6lb / 72 / _ _ - - 42 0 \\ / 64 lk 70 66 —�^� �► � � i / Bjk /