Southwick Zoning Board Denies Foster Road Construction

In a recent Southwick Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, the board voted unanimously to deny an application for the construction of a house on Foster Road. The application, which had undergone a detailed review and discussion due to concerns about its impact on wetlands and the feasibility of building on the lot, was ultimately rejected after the board’s deliberation.

The meeting began with a public hearing at 7:05 pm for an application from 11 Shagbark Drive, where the applicant, Andrew Brom, requested an 11-foot front setback variance for the construction of a garage. The board evaluated the proposal, examining the garage’s dimensions, placement, and construction plans. Following a discussion about the necessity of the variance and the precise measurements from the property line, the variance was granted to the applicant.

Moving on to another issue, the board addressed a revised site plan for a property on Foster Road. The applicant, present via Zoom, provided a walkthrough of the revised proposal with a screen share, outlining adjustments to the house’s shape and placement, specifically regarding setback distances and the septic system’s location. The board raised questions about the suitability of the lot for construction and potential impacts on surrounding wetlands and buffer zones. Members debated the hardship presented by the lot and challenged the buildability of the proposed project.

After a thorough evaluation, the board reached a consensus, resulting in the unanimous denial of the application. The decision came after careful consideration of the environmental implications and the practical challenges of the project. The applicant, upon hearing the board’s decision, inquired about the appeal process.

Additionally, the board had scheduled discussions for other upcoming applications, including a shed on Feeding Hills Road, a continuation for a new house on Lake Drive, and an inquiry for a potential variance at either 15 or 17 Shore Drive. There was also mention of an application for a new house on George Lumis Road, which required additional details before a hearing could be scheduled.

Note: This meeting summary was generated by AI, which can occasionally misspell names, misattribute actions, and state inaccuracies. This summary is intended to be a starting point and you should review the meeting record linked above before acting on anything you read. If we got something wrong, let us know. We’re working every day to improve our process in pursuit of universal local government transparency.

Receive debriefs about local meetings in your inbox weekly:

Trending meetings
across the country: