Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA continues 22 Newton Street variance amid septic access and setback concerns
Summary
The Town of Southborough Zoning Board of Appeals on May 6 continued a hearing on a variance request from homeowner Cladamir Obana to build a two‑car garage at 22 Newton Street after board members and the health agent said the proposal could block access to the septic system and violate setback protections.
The Town of Southborough Zoning Board of Appeals continued a public hearing on May 6 on a variance petition by Cladamir Obana of 22 Newton Street to build a two‑car garage that would encroach on the side setback.
Why it matters: Board members and staff flagged two core concerns that led to the continuance: (1) compliance with building‑code separation requirements (Table R302.1 of the IRC) and (2) a board‑of‑health determination that the proposed garage could block all service access to the property’s septic system, potentially preventing future replacement or excavation if the system fails.
Obana, who told the board English is not his first language, said he needs the garage for practical reasons including protecting multiple vehicles. “I just say, ‘Oh, you guys help me out. Let me do my garage,’” he told the board, adding that he recently spent thousands to repair damage inside one of his cars. He provided photographs and measurements to illustrate the driveway and yard layout.
Board members pressed for specifics about access. One member noted the site shows only about 7½ feet on one side and questioned whether that would permit excavation equipment to reach a failed leach field. The building commissioner and the board of health both told the board they had concerns: the building official pointed to required fire separation (R302.1) and the board of health warned that the garage, as proposed, could obstruct any future septic work.
Members offered alternatives for the applicant to consider, including a narrower or tandem garage layout, attaching a structure to the house, or seeking a recorded easement from an adjacent property owner to preserve emergency access. Staff suggested the applicant meet with the building commissioner and the board of health to craft a design that protects access and meets code.
“Based on what I’ve heard from the building commissioner and the board of health, I can’t see that I would be in favor of approving it the way it is,” a board member said during deliberations.
The board voted to continue the hearing to June 10 to give the applicant time to consult with the board of health, the building commissioner and neighbors, and to return with revised plans or a recorded easement. The motion to continue passed with all members present voting in favor: Jamie (yes), Doris (yes), Paul (yes) and Mike (yes).
Next steps: The hearing is continued to June 10; the applicant was advised to coordinate with health and building officials and to provide revised drawings or documentation of any proposed easement before the board considers the variance again.
