The City Council voted to send the petition to both the Zoning, Planning & Development and the Legislative & Ordinance committees for further review after the owners of the property requested a zone change at 11 Airport Drive. (File photo by chief photographer Frederick Gore)
WESTFIELD – The owner of property at the intersection of Apremont Way and Airport Drive changed a zoning map amendment to address concerns raised by members of the Planning Board at the City Council public hearing Thursday, Aug. 16
Attorney Calvin Annio presented the petition to council members and explained the changes incorporated since the Planning Board voted on Aug. 7, to send the City Council a negative recommendation on the petition submitted by Mark and Bette Staruk of 11 Lenora St., Worcester.
The couple owns a triangular shaped parcel of land, with a single-family residence at the point of the parcel with an address of 67 Apremont Way, and a 2,500-square-foot commercial building, which houses two businesses, at 11 Airport Drive. The two businesses are Westfield Equipment, which sells and services yard equipment such as lawnmowers, snow blowers, chain saws, as well as other equipment, and R.J.M. Landscaping, Inc. a Southampton-based firm which services western Massachusetts.
The parcel would be subdivided to create separate parcels for the house and commercial building. The remaining property, 2.55 acres, has frontage on both Apremont Way and Airport Drive. The Planning Board members expressed several concerns about the current and possible future use of the property if the zoning was changed as petitioned, including the fact that residential lots could be created next to Barnes Regional Airport.
The property is currently zoned as Industrial A. The couple was originally seeking to change that to a Business A zone to be more compatible with the current residential and commercial use.
However, Annio said Thursday, that the proposal has been changed to change only the zoning of the property along Apremont Way and the commercial building on Airport Drive and maintain the rear section, roughly have of the 2.5 acres of undeveloped property, as Industrial A property which would prohibit residential development next to the airport.
“The plan submitted tonight has been amended to address the concerns raised by the Planning Department,” Annio said. “Business A would allow four residential lots along Airport Drive, not a compatible use in that area (next to the airport), so the Planning Department suggested that the Industrial A line be continued, precluding residential development.”
Annio said that the residential lot at the intersection of the two roads is currently “non-conforming in terms of both use and size” in an Industrial A zone which requires lots to be at least one acre and which prohibits residential use and that the zone change would make the commercial building a conforming to the Business A.
“There are currently two businesses in the building, one is interested in taking over the whole building and purchasing it now, but can’t create the one-acre lot required in Industrial A.,” Annio said.
“The Planning Board gave a negative recommendation, but nobody spoke against the petition at the (Planning Board) public hearing,” Annio said. “The (Planning) Board’s concern that there was a contractor’s yard operation is a valid and reasonable concern, something not allowed in a Business A zone and something that will not continue.”
The City Council voted to send the petition to both the Zoning, Planning & Development and the Legislative & Ordinance committees for further review.
To see video of the August 16 City Council meeting, click here.
