Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVariance - denied (20) a Fee APPLICATION FOR Receipt No. / 8 TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ImR?ANT: This application must be submitted to the Planning Department by the second Friday of the preceding month to insure being heard at the next meeting. ALL ITEMS MUST BE ANSWERED AND ALL SUPPLEMENTS MUST BE SUBMITTED. THE APPLICATION WILL BE RETURNED IF INCOMPLETE. - The application and supplements must be filed in duplicate. - The application must be typewritten or printed in ink. - A Class D or better survey of the property in question must be submitted with the application showing streets, lot lines; building lines, zone boundary lines, dimensions, and buildings present or proposed, and buildings on adjacent properties and distance from subject property. - If a variance is being requested, a legal description of the property must be submitted with the application. This description can be obtained from mortgage records. - The sign from the Planning Department must be displayed on the property at least 10 days prior to the public hearing in a location visible from all abutting streets. - The applicant, or a representative, mugt be present for the public hearing. The time, date and place of the hearing will be advised by mail. - Inquiries on this application may be directed to the Planning Department at the South Windsor Town Hall. APPLICANT: 2,vea,- 0 I T MAILING ADDRESS CT Quo 4 OWNER OF RECORD OF PROPERTY IN QUESTION LOCATION OF PROPERTY IN QUESTION/©O��`t 1��.2;��T. r .� 1�� .G� c- ZONE OF PROPERTY IN QUESTION CHECK ONE OF THE FOLLOWING:[21 Request Variance to Section %-'5e-2 of the Zoning Regulations to allow 7A°,4— cf �Tl D � )ai4-e-'p L©T- LDc,*�.Ep 19-r /4�� 1/�i2'�� - or state: hearing under Section of the General Statutes for F� or temporary and conditional permit for Dor an appeal from the Zoning Officer's decision involving Is applicant a corporation or co-partnership? (If Corporation, submit a list of officers. If Co-partnership, submit a list of owners) . Is the applicant owner, lessee, or prospective tenant? 60Gt/s 't / Are there any liquor outlets within the restricted area? vim (If yes, submit a list of the liquor outlets, their locations and distances from the property in question) . Is this property within 500 feet of another town line? State clearly the unusual hardship or exceptional difficulty that prompts this application and indicate why other options are unacceptable. (Use a separate sheet of paper if necessary) . Dated this day -Year`-Year/91Y9 Tele hone APPLICANT: �. (S aturQ) OWNER: 64 -(� (Signature) I)en N G� ic1 �UC�t-ems ACTION OF THE BOARD Nk)J, a Ci 7 GRANTED D NIED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:<% . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. . . . . . . . . . % . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .G .�. . . . . Attachment to: Aoolicaii'ion for Town of South Winder Zoning Board of Appeals R. C. & C. N. Hatch 1080 Avery St. South Windsor, CT 06074 A. Hardship --Financial 1. 15 acres previously bought for investment is devalued to current house on single 15 acre lot without rear (East) access as requested. 2. West (Avery St.) boundary was never feasible as an access due to prohibitive cost, i .e. , $200 per foot x 1100 feet equals $220,000 for road running East/West to rear of property. 3. South is bounded by Forin and is unaccessible. 4. North has commitments (JMJ) or houses in only feasible entry area. B. Hardship - -Physical Gainful employment career is curtailed due to: 1. Increasing deafness (contact: Dr. Carpenter). 2. D.A.V. with deteriorating leg disability (contact: Newington V.A. Hospital) . 3. Spinal Sclerosis (contact: Dr. Druckmiller, Neurosurgeon) . The latter two also dictate the need for single story dwelling in the near future. r► I REQUEST THIS SECTION NOT BE INTRODUCED IN PUBLIC HEARING SAVE FOR GENERIC "Personal Health." C. Character of Neighborhood 1. A 5-acre building lot greatly enhances a fairly dense neighboring area of 1/2 and 3/4 acre lots. 2. A single building lot of 5 acres prevents other RR zone allowable activities which may nit lend themselves to the character of the neighborhood. 0. "Lanc�Locked" Si uat �)t Self Crpatp,�• I. Selling lot on Avery St. had no impact on ac sale vas used to college educate three child (See A. 1. ). This 2. Over the years, Carol and I tracked and contacted three builders: T&M, LaCava and U&R. potential 3. We missed JMJ notice, possible we were out of state. Since we don't know when the hearing was held, it's impossible to state why we missed it. Our intent was, obviously, to be at any hearing which might impact our investment. 4• It is my understanding that others attending the meeting, and who had surrounding land, were provided with appropriate R.O.W. 's• 5• Verbal agreement was reached with JMJ in May 1988 to sell some land outright. Agreement later abandoned of housing. by JMJ due to market conditions E. PLtQede= 1• Many rear lots with limited frontage exist in South Windsor. have the character that this would have, i .e. , wooded, secludedewith scenic view. F. R.O.W. Lo at inn 1. Shown and labeled on Engineering map previously submitted. 2. Ownership of R.O.W. would revert to R.C. & C.N. Hatch and would be part of proposed 5 acre lot. 3. JMJ signed agreement to provide R.O.W. is part of ZBA records as a result of previous application on 5/4/89. G. 51MMAU 1• I regret I can only address issues identified in the Worksession MinutIr dated 5/11/89 and resulting from the 5/4/89 ZBA meeting. Actual recording of worksession has been lost and, so, is unavailable to me. 2. I request this be judged in a positive fashion regarding the goo All residents and taxpayers. Terms such as "self-created" implyd of issues which should rightfully be posed when I can provide rationale in person. J - ,( �SQgN 8 fq`� _ rA 7-own O-P SouA ?&U� U 9 wQ 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE . SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 �rl�soR.CO AREA CODE 203/644-2511 EM40RAMDUM: October 4, 1989 TO: Thomas Murrin, Vice Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning ,' DATE: October 3, 1989 RE: Application #1498-89, Robert & Carol Hatch Request for variance Per your request, I offer the following observations regarding the above-referenced application. First, state statutes and case law strongly indicate that variances should be granted sparingly; and generally just in cases where there is a hardship with the land. Such hardship should be specific to the property itself and not occur regularly on properties within a given zoning district. The subject application does not appear to meet this criteria, in that there are numerous properties throughout the Rural Residential zone which have significant depth to them, and which would benefit economically from a similar variance. Second, the Planning & Zoning Commission has elected not to address the issue of rear lots in the past. The appropriateness of Planning & Zoning Commission's inaction notwithstanding, granting of the subject application would undermine the scheme of zoning. The whole arena of interior lots should properly be addressed by the Planning & Zoning Commission. With all of the current emphasis on affordable housing, this might be a good time for an application to Planning & Zoning Commission for a regulations amendment. Third, the courts have also held that financial loss or gain should not be considered as long as some use of the property is possible, because a variance is granted to the property, not to the owner. 1 The applicant's stated hardships are emotionally compelling; and the comments about the character of the neighborhood may seem to be convincing arguments for the granting of a variance. However, South Windsor's Zoning map readily displays many other properties in the vicinity to which these same arguments could apply. For all of the above reasons, it is my professional opinion that a variance should not be granted. Please note that if the Board chooses to grant a variance, it appears that the existing lots in Partridge Meadow Subdivision have the necessary frontage to accommodate the suggested lot modifications. Also, Planning & Zoning Commission resubdivision approval for the new lot would be necessary. , I � I PARI�JE _ _ LAIJE RrtG�NT of�►Y rzTRlo EA ov!" �., nt�►s�ora ' s Ff-G N c a C F LOT i Z E I I122, 'ro eE REvlc_,FC WITH v,E t T 1- -.-I I,/I J I p.-;5c! 7.ONEI LY w w ^�ltSGtt.tO _ f�2 I I 1 LLJd + i I 1 Rf� Zvt.rE Attachment to: Aoolicath on for Town of South Windsor Zoning Board of Ao e� als R. C. & C. N. Hatch 1080 Avery St. South Windsor, CT 06074 A. Hardship - Financial 1. 15 acres previously bought for investment is devalued to current house on single 15 acre lot without rear (East) access as requested. 2. West (Avery St. ) boundary was never feasible as an access due to prohibitive cost, i .e. , $200 per foot x 1100 feet equals $220,000 for road running East/West to rear of property. 3. South is bounded by Forin and is unaccessible. 4. North has commitments (JMJ) or houses in only feasible entry area. B. Hardship - Physical Gainful employment career is curtailed due to: 1. Increasing deafness (contact: Dr. Carpenter). 2. D.A.V. with deteriorating leg disability (contact: Newington V.A. Hospital) . 3. Spinal Sclerosis (contact: Dr. Druckmiller, Neurosurgeon). The latter two also dictate the need for single story dwelling in the near future. I REQUEST THIS SECTION NOT BE INTRODUCED IN PUBLIC HEARING SAVE FOR GENERIC "Personal Health." C. Character of Neighborhood 1. A 5-acre building lot greatly enhances a fairly dense neighboring area of 1/2 and 3/4 acre lots. 2. A single building lot of 5 acres prevents other RR zone allowable activities which may nDj lend themselves to the character of the neighborhood. October 5, 1989 Zoning Board of Appeals My name is Robert Hatch. My wife, Carol , and I reside at 1080 Avery St. , South Windsor, CT. We are appealing to the ZBA to permit a variance to Zoning Regulation - paragraphs 3.14.1 (re Rear Dwellings) and/or 5.2.3 (re Frontage). Specifically we request to be allowed to create a rear lot as shown on the provided engineering map. Said rear lot would consist of between four and five acres using a legal right of way as provided by JMJ construction and as also noted on the provided map. The requested lot would be used for the purpose of building a ape private residence. .31"110. Let me state at the outset that this is a re-application. The previous appeal was made publicly to the ZBA on May 5, 1989 and numbered #1869-89. Application #1869-89 was denied without prejudice during ZBA Worksession dated May 11, 1989. Let me further state that an audio recording is made during ZBA worksessions as a matter of public record. This, plus some minimal Secretarial minutes normally provides narrative plus detailed comments which may be addressed by the appealer in such cases as this when the appeal is denied without prejudice. In the instance of ZBA Worksession on May 11, 1989, the audio tape is apparently irrevocably lost. Consequently, I hope you will bear with me since my reapplication must necessarily address the Secretarial minutes only. Prior to rebuttal or further argument on my part, I would like to address precedence for permitting a rear building lot without the required frontage. While there are numerous such cases having been approved,- I cite ZBA Appeal # 1496-83. Case # 1496-83 appears to be a situation similar to ours in which Arthur and Barbara Williams of 80 Miller road did apply for creation of a rear lot of 8.4 acres using only right of way access onto Miller Road. The ROW access into this lot is approximately 180' long. This appeal was granted and made effective on March 16, 1983. I now reference and will address comments elicited from ZBA Worksession Secretarial minutes dated May 11, 1989 as follows: ZBA Comment A• Nothing in this application that points to a hardship unique to this piece of property. Rebuttal A-1• Our reapplication for this meeting by attachment addresses my medical situation which I see no reason to reintroduce in detail . I will summarize it by stating that my earning career will almost certainly be shortened and that I will require single floor dwelling in the fairly near future. Rebuttal A-2• As a vital part of retirement, and especially early retirement, it is absolutely necessary to consider finances Perhaps this can best be illustrated by employing some very approximate figures. Consultation with area Realtors provides a gross estimate that my current property should be worth $275,000. This figure would be devalued very little, it at all, if the land area were reduced from 15 acres to 10 acres. I 'm sure that all persons knowledgeable to South Windsor economy will agree that a decent house lot such as I am attempting to create carries a price tag of $100,000. Thus, Carol & I could expect to sell at $275,000, build a house of equal quality on our own lot for only $175,000. If my calculations are anywhere near correct, we would expect to continue living in the exact same area but free of all mortgages by such a transaction. Without ZBA approval , our entire 15 acres is reduced to the value of a single house lot. Comment B: Concern was expressed about where the access would be and who would own the access. Rebuttal B: Access is shown and cross-hatched in Reino E. Hyyppa & Associates map dated April 5, 1989 resubmitted herewith for convenience of the Board. Ownership of the proposed right of way would revert to Robert & Carol Hatch. Comment 'C' : The question was raised regarding whether other alternatives have been explored by the applicants. Rebuttal 'C' : Since I personally feel I have explored LU alternatives and since this comment appgars to be related to the next, and last, comment, I will defer further rebuttal . Comment 'D' : The commission felt that this is a "self-created situation. " Rebuttal 'D' : Here the lack of records really hampers me since I'm reduced to guesswork as to how it might be self-created. Let me begin by guessing that a misconception exists in that I could have accessed via Avery St. had I not previously sold a lot on Avery St. This lot was sold to pay college bills for my three children after we had determined that access was financially non-feasible. Using JMJ figures of $200 per running foot, access to our eastern boundary (proposed lot) because of the need to avoid the high tension R.O.W. as shown on the map and because of the topography, would cost just under a quarter of a million dollars ignoring all legal fees and assuming permit approvals. This was clearly not a viable alternative. My second guess is that there is a unanimous feeling that I should have attended the P&Z meeting during which the current Partridge Meadows was approved and fought for access at that time. However, I don't believe there is one among you who can honestly believe I would have missed such a critical meeting had I known about it! Carol and I tracked three previous builders (T&M, LaCava & U&R) prior to JMJ as the property around us ping-ponged from potential builder to potential builder. I drive past Avery & Dart Hill every day enroute to work when I'm in town. Certainly, I would have seen a public notice sign. My only theory is that I was out of the country for an extended business trip at a very inappropriate time. In contrast I believe other surrounding landowners were accommodated satisfactorily prior to JMJ development approval . I also strongly believe that had I attended and stated my problem, I would have access to my-back area now instead of having to appeal for a variance. In lieu of this, my only possible solution is this appeal to the ZBA. Let me summarize as follows: I. I believe I have adequately demonstrated both medical and financial hardship. 2. I think I've explored all alternatives including aborted negotiations with JMJ due to the decline in housing market. If anyone has further suggestions, I would welcome them. 3. The submittal map shows the proposed access. The final area determination of the proposed lot (between four or five acres) will be made after due consideration is given to retaining the atmosphere of the existing building. I want to ensure preservation of my current property as a mini-farm. Final house location, if approved, will be selected with full consideration given to isolating said residence from neighboring houses. This is facilitated by it being a densely wooded area. 4. Without access to further detail , I think I've dispelled all references to a self-created situation. 5. I 've shown precedence. 6. A single family dwelling on a large lot is not only in keeping with the character of the neighborhood - it enhances it greatly. 7. Finally, I would emphasize that the two large wooded lots resulting from this request would preserve 15 natural and beautiful rural acres in the core of several densely built up developments while causing a negative impact on absolutely no one. We hope you will see fit to grant this variance. Thank you for your time and your patience! Robert & Carol Hatch 1080 Avery St. South Windsor, CT i Volume 234 Page N° 244 C � n CI -1--d L.,-I 51.-4 S-Mee,I•a WARRAN DEED (Sarriror.6ip1 Na U{SS »— y d!*� han{ad.C-nn-e�leul IF.L s . To all People to whom these Presents shall come, Greeting; 03273 »�>L� KNOW YE, THAT DAVIS H. LANE and SANDRA E. LANE, both of the Town of South Windsor, County of Hartford and State of Connecticut for the consideration of NINETY SEVEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED ($97,500.00) ?` DOLLARS received to their full satisfaction of ROBERT C. HATCH and CAROL N. HATCH, both of the said Town of South Windsor •y 7.25 Conv ante Tax recehwp Town Clark ai bc.:Ji W,..:.'sS do give, grant, bargain,sell.and confirm unto the said ROBERT C. HATCH and CAROL N. HATCH and the survivor of them, and the heirs and assigns of the survivor of them forever acxztdtio All those three certain pieces or parcels of lan4 with all improvements thereon located in the Town of South Windsor, County of Hartford and State of Connecticut,.easterly of Avery Street so called, being more ', particularly bounded and described as follows, to witr t _ FIRST PIECEt Commencing at a point eat in the east boundary of Avery Street so called, which point marks the northwesterly corner of premise owned now or formerly by Stephen T. Foran and Nikki L. Foran; thence moving north along the east boundary of said Avery Street, a distance o approximately fourteen and eighty one-hundredths (14.80) feet to a r point which marks the southwest corner of the third piece hereinafter described; thence turning at an interior angle of 109•11'080 and running along the southerly line of said third piece hereinafter described, a distance of six hundred seventy-five and fifty-four one-hundredths (675.54) feet to an iron pin marking the southeasterly corner of said other land of the third piece hereinafter described; thence turning at an interior angle 261.131150 and running northerly along the easterly line of said third piece hereinafter described, a distance of two hundred seventy and fifty-one one-hundredths (270.51) feet to a point set in the southerly line of land owned now or formerly by Clinton B. Buckland, marking-the northwesterly corner of the premises herein described; thence turning at an interior angle 900 and running along the said southerly line of land owned now or formerly by said Clinton B. Buckland, a distance of fifty and forty-seven one-hundredths (50.47) feet to an iron pipe; thence continuing in an easterly direction along the southerly line of land owned now or formerly by Clinton B. Buckland, a distance of six hundred nineteen and forty-eight one-hundredths _ (619.48) feet to an iron pipe marking the northeasterly corner of the premises herein dascribed, which iron pipe is situated in the westerly 4. line of land now or formerly owned by American Sumatra Tobacco Corporation; thence turning at an interior angle of 80.541459 and running southerly a distance of one hundred seventy-four and sixty one- hundredths (174.60) feet along the westerly line of land owned now or formerly by American Sumatra Tobacco Corporation to an iron pipe; thenc continuing in a southerly direction along the westerly line of land owned now or formerly by American Sumatra Tobacco Corporation; a distance of approximately three hundred thirty-two and twenty-nine one- hundredths (332.291 feet to a point which marks the northeast corner ; of said premises owned now or formerly by Stephen T. Foran and Nikki L. Foran; thence moving N 85.46142" W along the northerly boundary of said premises owned now or formerly by said Foran's, a distance of seven hundred fifty (750) feet to a point; thence continuing N 85046142" W i along the northerly boundary of said premises owned now or formerly by , 6` said Foran's, a distance of approximately five hundred nineteen (519) / feet to a point set in the easterly boundary of said Avery Street, which point is the point and place of beginning. i f , 1 c., Volume 234 Page NY 245 t SECOND PIECE: Being a certain piece or parcel of rear land situated on the eas erly side of Avery Street in the said Town of South Windsor, more particularly bounded and described as follows, to wits NORTH: by land now or formerly of Helen Gulley; EAST: by land now or -formerly o,_f Benedict Rupchunos et al; SOUTH: by land now or formerly of Davis H. Lane, et all and land now or formerly of Homer D. Lane, partly by each; n' and WEST: by land now or formerly of Frank T. Visgilio, Jr. et al; The westerly line of said premises described herein is located three . hundred twenty-five (325) feet easterly from Avery Street and is three hundred twenty-five (325) .feet east from the parallel to said Avery Street. THIRD PIECE: Being a certain piece or parcel of land, with all Improvements thereont located in said Town of South Windsor, on the easterly side of Avery Street, so-called, and more particularly bounded and described as follows, to wit: Commencing at a point narked by an iron pipe set in the east boundary of Avery Street, w;.ich point mark d the soutk&est corner of premises ' owned now or formerly by Clinton B. Buckland; thence moving east along the south boundary of said Buckiand's land, a distance of thirty-three and sixty-six one-hundredths (33.66) .feet to a merestone; thence continuing east along the south boundary of said Buckland's land, n j distance of three hundred sixty-six and eighty-nine one-hundredths i (366.89) feet to a point; thence continuing east at an interior angle of 180002'26", a distance of one hundred ninety-nine and forty-five 111 =r` one-hundredths (199.45) feet to a point; .thence moving south along othe• land of Homer D. Lane at an interior angle of 901, a distance of two hundred seventy and fifty-one one-hundredths (270.51) feet to a point; thence moving west at an interior angle of 98.46145", a distance of six hundred seventy-five and fifty-four one-hundredths (675.54) feet to a point marked by an iron pipe set in the east boundary of said Avery Street; thence moving north along the east boundary of said Avery Stree and at an interior an of 70148'52" a distance of ninety-two and sixty-four one-hundredths (92.64) feet to an iron pipet thence z continuing north along the east boundary of said Avery Street, a distance of two hundred eighty-seven and fifty-two one-hundredths r (287.52) feet to the poifit and place of beginning. The last described bound makes an interior angle with the first e described bound of 100021157". ;.` - Said premises above are conveyed subject to building, building line and zoning restrictions of the Town of South Windsor; subject to a pole easement as of record appears; and subject to taxes on the Grand Lists of October 1, 1976 and October 1, 1977, payable to the Town of South Windsor, which taxes the Grantees herein assume and agree to pay as part consideration for this deed. z AVERY STREET , e�s�ti ,� 25 2� J QUAIL D A —i m � 3co; 3�•, J D C raarraraaa�rrr ■a I �� _. 17 y9 9� ly� 41 D ■ rr�■ m IPHn,s I I5) , ty1 �i q�• q8; 5� tsl' ,52) (w) PHEASANT WAY 1 to j cJ l 1"t) / 1 March 14, 1 9 8 9 To Whom It May Concern: I , Jean-Marc Jacques, President of JMJ Construction Co. , Inc. , do hereby warrant and guarantee Robert C. & Carol N. Hatch of 1080 Avery St ., South Windsor, CT that I will provide legal access to their T property. Said access shall be for the pua•pose of constructing a residential dwelling with said access being located on the Eastern border and In the Northeast quadrant of the Hatch property. Sa,d a_c«ss Shall C,046,6Z• cr Zan ,;4 lot' -Ot/3 a.-,& Z�joj ('1o) �ceZ-irt AV d steal/Yt'Dt- res.,%z`ih me /o.ss �' a �` Dated . 3 2 J.- M. J. Construction C,6. , Inc. President ✓ Volume 234 Ppoe N? 244 Cl.ordond L. d Blonk Sarlea,Inc. WARRANTEE DEED (Survivorship) No. 114% j#M%6 Hartford,Connecticut To all People to whom these Presents shall come, Greeting: f 03273 KNOW YE, THAT DAVIS H. LANE and SANDRA E. LANE, both of the Town ii of South Windsor, County of Hartford and State of Connecticut for the consideration of NINETY SEVEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED ($97,500.00) DOLLARSt received to their full satisfaction of ROBERT C. HATCH and CAROL No HATCH, both of the said Town of South Windsor •� 7.25 conv ance Tax rerelk'P� � r 1'cwn Cler'r'3i do give, grant, bargain, sell.and confirm unto the said ROBERT C. HATCH and CAROL No HATCH and the survivor of them,and the heirs and assigns of the survivor of them forever al:xsMio All those three certain pieces or parcels of land with all improvements thereon located in the Town of South Windsor, County of Hartford and State of Connecticut,.easterly of Avery Street so called, being more particularly bounded and described as follows, to wits FIRST PIECEI Commencing at a point set in the east boundary of Avery r. Street so called, which point marks the northwesterly corner of premise owned now or formerly by Stephen T. Foran and Nikki L. Foran; thence moving north along the east boundary of said Avery Street, a distance o approximately fourteen and eighty one-hundredths (14.80) feet to a l point which marks the southwest corner of the third piece hereinafter described; thence turning at an interior angle of 109.11108" and runnin along the southerly line of said third piece hereinafter described, a distance of six hundred seventy-five and fifty-four one-hundredths (675.54) feet to an iron pin marking the southeasterly corner of said j other land of the third piece hereinafter described; thence turning at ! an interior angle 261.13115" and running northerly along the easterly line of said third piece hereinafter described, a distance of two hundred seventy and fifty-one one-hundredths (270.51) feet to a point set in the southerly line of land owned now or formerly by Clinton B. I Buckland, marking the northwesterly corner of the promises herein described; thence turning at an interior angle 909 and running along the said southerly line of land owned now or formerly by said Clinton B. Buckland, a distanco of fifty and forty-seven one-hundredths (50.47) feet to an iron pipe; thence continuing in an easterly direction along f the southerly line of land owned now or formerly by Clinton B. Buckland, 6 a distance of six hundred nineteen and forty-eight one-hundredths (619.48) feet to an iron pipe marking the northeasterly corner of the premises herein dascribed, which iron pipe is situated in the westerly line of land now or formerly owned by American Sumatra Tobacco Corporation; thence turning at an interior angle of 80.54145" and running southerly a distance of one hundred seventy-four and sixty one- hundredths (174.601 feet along the westerly line of land owned now or formerly by American Sumatra Tobacco Corporation to an iron pipe; thence �- continuing in a southerly direction along the westerly line of land ' 4. owned now or formerly by American Sumatra Tobacco Corporation; a distance of approximately three hundred thirty-two and twenty-nine one- hundredths (332.291 feet to a point which marks the northeast corner q of said premises owned now or formerly by Stephen T. Foran and Nikki L. Foran; thence moving N 85446142" W along the northerly boundary of said premises owned now or formerly by said Foran's, a distance of seven = hundred fifty (750) feet to a point; thence continuing N 85946'42" W along the northerly boundary of said premises owned now or formerly by a' said Foran's, a distance of approximately five hundred nineteen (519) . feet to a point set in the easterly boundary of said Avery Street, i f' which point is the point and place of beginning. i- Volume 234 Page N° 245 SECOND PIECE: Being a certain piece or parcel of rear land situated on a eas erly side of Avery Street in the said Town of South Windsor, { more particularly bounded and described as follows, to wit: NORTH: by land now or formerly of Helen Gulley; x= EAST: by land now or formerly of Benedict Kupchunos et al; SOUTH: by land now or formerly of Davis H. Lane, et al; and land now or formerly of Homer D. Lane, partly by each; and WEST: by land now or formerly of Frank T. Visgilio, Jr. et al; The westerly line of said premises described herein is located three . hundred twenty-five (325) feet easterly from Avery Street and is three hundred twenty-five (325) .feet east from the parallel to said Avery Street. THIRD PIECE: Being a certain piece or parcel of land, with all mprovements thereon, located in said Town of South Windsor, on the easterly side of Avery Street, so-called, and more particularly i bounded and described as follows, to wit: Commencing at a point marked by an iron pipe set in the east boundary of Avery Street, w;.ich point markd the southwest corner of premises owned now or formerly by Clinton B. Buckland; thence moving east along the south boundary of said Buckland's land, a distance of thirty-three and sixty-six one-hundredths (33.66) feet to a merestone; thence ' continuing east along the south boundary of said Buckland's land, a ' distance of three hundred sixty-six and eighty-nine one-hundredths i (366.89) feet to a point; thence continuing east at an interior angle i ,,- of 180002126", a distance of one hundred ninety-nine and forty-five ' one-hundredths (199.45) feet to a point; thence moving south along other r land of Homer D. Lane at an interior angle of 900, a distance of two ,.; hundred seventy and fifty-one one-hundredths (270.51) feet to a point; thence moving west at an interior angle of 98.46145", a distance of six hundred seventy-five and fifty-four one-hundredths (675.54) feet to ' a point marked by an iron pipe set in the east boundary of said Avery Street; thence moving north along the east boundary of said Avery Street ± and at an interior angle of 70048152" a distance of ninety-two and sixty-four one-hundredths (92.64) feet to an iron pipe; thence continuing north along the east boundary of said Avery Street, a distance of two hundred eighty-seven and fifty-two one (287.52) feet to the poifit and place of beginning. i s,. The last described bound makes an interior angle with the first ! described bound of 100021157". t Said premises above are conveyed subject to building, building line and zoning restrictions of the Town of South Windsor; subject to a pole easement as of record appears; and subject to taxes on the Grand Lists of October 1, 1976 and October 1, 1977, payable to the Town of South Windsor, which taxes the Grantees herein assume and agree to pay as part consideration for this deed. . o "4 O Y 711W.An O-P 1S_0_a& a ?&zt� 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE . SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074 f��soR•ca� AREA CODE 203/644-2511 November 13 , 1989 CERTIFIED MAIL Mr. & .Mrs. Robert Hatch 1080 Avery Street South Windsor, Ct 06074 RE: Application #1498-89 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Hatch; At the meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on November 2, 1989 , the board denied without prejudice your request for a variance to Section 5. 2 & 3.14 of the Zoning Regulations for the creation of a rear lot on property located at 1080 Avery Street, South Windsor, RR Zone The Zoning Board of Appeals is looking to the Planning & Zoning Commission for some input into the Zoning Regulations to deal with rear lots, or some guidance to the board on granting variances to approving these lots. It would be suggested that you wait to re-apply until these guidelines are received. Very truly yours, Thomas Murrin Vice-Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals TM/dlb CC: Planning & Zoning Commission' TOWN OF SOUTH VONM OR - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1498 Received from of �K-U _ ?.4 .-—r t.Gi ------ ---- - ---------------- -- - --- -------- . Dollars fee for a hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals. This hearing is to cover application number �i___..___ v , , --------- ---------------- Dated at South Wind ----------_ Windsor,Conn. this t... ----- day of 4- -- --- --- C """ '- ---------------------------- ----i Q- Si ne a SECRETARY --------------