Amherst Zoning Board hears request for accessory-structure variances at 647 Mill Street; decision pending

The Amherst Zoning Board of Appeals heard a request for variances affecting 647 Mill Street during its Aug. 26 meeting and went into a closed deliberative session before returning to open session with no public announcement of a final decision on the variances.

"We are looking to get a variance for the 2 structures of the 8 by 8 shed and 12 by 16 pergola," said Jake Polatowski of Integrated Restoration, who presented the application on behalf of homeowners Jim Polinski and Daniel Dopart. The applicant told the board the pergola provides shade for an occupant with a medical condition and that a 20-by-20 garage on the lot will be removed and rebuilt on the same footprint.

Board members and staff walked through the code implications: the chair read limits on permitted accessory structures and a staff member confirmed that tertiary accessory structures shall not exceed 64 square feet under the cited chapter (as stated in the public record). Polatowski said the existing pergola is 12 by 16 (192 square feet) and the shed is 8 by 8. The application therefore seeks a variance both to allow an additional accessory structure on the parcel and to allow the oversized pergola.

A staff speaker recounted the property's prior approvals, noting a previously approved 28-by-30 (approximately 840 square feet) accessory building and a retroactive variance that had previously covered a 20-by-20 garage. That history, the staff member said, affects which variances are still needed for the current proposal.

After applicant presentations and questions from board members the chair moved the board into deliberative session; the motion was made by Mr. Balaji and seconded by Mr. Anderson and approved on a roll-call vote. The transcript resumes with the board back in regular session but does not record a public motion, vote or findings on the variances. The chair had told applicants they would be notified in writing within 14 days of the board's decision.

Because the public transcript does not record the board's final action on the variance application, the outcome is listed as pending; applicants and the public should expect written notice as stated by the chair.