TUESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2013
REGULAR MEETING
SENIOR CENTER
HOLLY GREEN PLAZA
391 NORWICH-WESTERLY ROAD
NORTH STONINGTON, CT 06359
DRAFT MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Charlie Burger called the Regular Meeting of the North Stonington Zoning Board of Appeals to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Sr. Center, Holly Green Plaza.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Charlie Burger, Chairman, James Lord, Vice-Chair, Candy Palmer, Heather Chrissos, and Alternate Members Hilaire Cote and Vilma Gregoropoulos
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Robin Hall, Secretary and Alternate Member Ed McGowan, III
STAFF PRESENT: Sr. Planner/ZEO Juliet Leeming, Administrative Assistant Cheryl Konsavitch and ZBA Consulting Attorney, Rob Avena
2. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: None
Chairman Burger read the Rules of Procedure for the Public Hearing into the record.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. ZBA Application #13-004, of Emma Dugas for property known as 45 Lakeside Dr., North Stonington, CT 06359, located on the west side of Lakeside Dr. approximately 90 feet west from the intersection of Lakeside Dr. with Cossaduck Hill Rd. (CT Rte. 201) in an R-80/SUOA. Applicant is requesting a variance to Section 1305.1 (Setback Dimensions) to reduce the side yard setback from the required 20 ft. to 9.49 ft. on the east side of the property in the vicinity of the house only and Section 1505.2A to allow an increase in cubical content of a non-conforming structure. Tax Map #45, Parcel #2611
Chairman Burger read the application into the record.
Seated: C. Burger, J. Lord, C. Palmer, H. Chrissos, H. Cote
Kristen Main of Kris Designs representing the applicant was present for this application.
Ms. Main submitted her green cards as proof of mailing to the abutters to the Land Use Office. Ms. Main went over the variance request stating that the applicant is proposing to remove the existing 8’0” x 20’6” porch and construct an addition to the kitchen of the same dimensions onto the existing 720 sq. ft. seasonal cottage. Ms. Main stated the house was built in 1955 and is a legal non-conforming structure and more land cannot be purchased to make the lot and house conforming. Ms. Main stated that if the addition was put within the setbacks, the septic system would be disturbed and would add unnecessary expense to the addition and the only access to the basement is under the current porch.
The Board asked general questions pertaining to this application.
ZEO Leeming went over her review of this application stating that a variance is being sought to allow an increase in cubicle content of a non-conforming structure. ZEO Leeming stated the existing cottage sits on a parcel that is comprised of 2 original lots, each approximately 25’x50’ in size and the lots were created and likely combined before zoning with the total lot width of only 52’ in the rear and 56’ in the front and the cottage is greater than 10’ wide, with the majority of the structure encroaching both the left and right side yard setbacks.
ZEO Leeming went over the applicant’s hardship and stated although there is an option to remove the deck and build the addition straight out towards the lake within the portion of the property that is within the buildable area, this may not be the shape addition they envisioned, nor would it be a very usable space for the use intended. ZEO Leeming stated with that said, the proposed addition in the same footprint as the porch would still be the better option aesthetically, with less disruption to the property and would prevent further encroachment toward the lake and lessen the chance of disturbing the septic system and changing the configuration would restrict access to the basement since the only access is from under the existing porch.
Chairman Burger asked if there was anyone from the public speaking in favor of this application. The following people spoke:
Bill Hixson
Wes Lamphere
Chairman Burger asked if there was anyone from the public speaking against this application. There were none.
Chairman Burger asked if there were any general remarks or comments from the public regarding this application. There were none.
Chairman Burger asked if the applicant would like to make a summarization or rebuttal. They did not.
MOTION by J. Lord, SECOND by H. Chrissos to close the public hearing on ZBA application #13-004. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MOTION by V. Gregoropoulos, SECOND by C. Palmer to amend the agenda to move to Item 4A under Pending Applications. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
4. PENDING APPLICATIONS:
A. ZBA Application #13-004, of Emma Dugas for property known as 45 Lakeside Dr., North Stonington, CT 06359, located on the west side of Lakeside Dr. approximately 90 feet west from the intersection of Lakeside Dr. with Cossaduck Hill Rd. (CT Rte. 201) in an R-80/SUOA. Applicant is requesting a variance to Section 1305.1 (Setback Dimensions) to reduce the side yard setback from the required 20 ft. to 9.49 ft. on the east side of the property in the vicinity of the house only and Section 1505.2A to allow an increase in cubical content of a non-conforming structure. Tax Map #45, Parcel #2611
Chairman Burger read the application into the record.
Seated: C. Burger, J. Lord, C. Palmer, H. Chrissos, H. Cote
MOTION by H. Cote, SECOND by J. Lord to approve ZBA Application #13-004, of Emma Dugas for property known as 45 Lakeside Drive, North Stonington, CT 06359, located on the west side of Lakeside Dr. approximately 90 feet west from the intersection of Lakeside Dr. with Cossaduck Hill Rd. (CT Rte. 201) in an R-80/SUOA. Applicant is requesting a variance to Section 1305.1 (Setback Dimensions) to reduce the side yard setback from the required 20 ft. to 9.49 ft. on the east side of the property in the vicinity of the house only and Section 1505.2A to allow an increase in cubical content of a non-conforming structure. Tax Map #45, Parcel #2611. Variances are necessary to construct an addition to the kitchen of the same dimensions by removing existing 8’x0” deep by 20’x6”
long porch.
The reasons to approve are as follows:
1. A strict application of the Regulations unreasonably restricts the use of the applicant’s property for permitted uses allowed in the zone, and causes an unusual hardship unnecessary to carrying out the general purposes of the zoning plan due to the unusually narrow lot configuration and lack of available land to purchase on the eastern boundary.
2. The variance requested is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Regulations.
3. Approval of the variance would not adversely affect the public health, safety, welfare, and value of the surrounding properties.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
B. ZBA Application #13-005, of Douglas L. & Janet S. Henderson, 62J Patricia Ave., North Stonington, CT 06359, located on the westerly side of Patricia Ave. approximately 2,110 feet south from the intersection of Patricia Ave. with Miller Rd. in an R-80. Applicant is requesting a correction of an error in an order, requirement, or decision made by the Zoning Enforcement Officer regarding the use of the referenced property. Tax Map #45, Parcel #5863
Chairman Burger read the application into the record.
Seated: C. Burger, J. Lord, C. Palmer, H. Chrissos, V. Gregoropoulos
Atty. Robert Avena, representing the Board and Atty. William McCoy, representing the applicant were present for this appeal.
ZEO Leeming read her abatement order into the record, which stated that no use may be established without a zoning permit and it is her understanding that a Commercial Kennel is being operated at this household without a permit. ZEO Leeming stated that recent complaints from neighbors regarding excessive noise from barking dogs and a website advertising that they breed dogs and are a serious hobby kennel prompted a drive-by inspection of the property. ZEO Leeming stated she observed an outdoor kennel structure and also after researching the property found there is no Special Permit on file for a kennel, nor accessory permits for the structures. ZEO Leeming stated that kennel tags have been obtained from the Town Clerk, but simply purchasing the tags does not mean you have the Town’s permission to
operate a kennel on the property. Dog kennels are only permitted by Special Permit in the R-80 Zone, and you must have a minimum of 10 acres, which they do not have. ZEO Leeming stated that in their ad, they do not consider themselves a business, but if dogs are being bred and money is being exchanged for the “adoption” or “placement” of these dogs in another home then it would be considered a business.
Atty. William McCoy, representing the Henderson’s stated this abatement order came out of a claim by 1 neighbor who complained of excessive noise coming from the property. Atty. McCoy stated the applicant has been at this property since the early 80’s and have had dogs and litters of dogs since they have moved in. Atty. McCoy stated the Henderson’s have 5 Golden’s which they own and keep in the house, except on nice days when they are in the outside kennel and their dogs have no more then 1 to 2 litters a year with the average litter being 6 to 8 puppies.
Atty. McCoy stated ZEO Leeming has described the situation fairly well in stating the zoning regulations only refer to commercial kennels, and all the Henderson’s dogs are their own dogs, and they do not bring in other dogs. Atty. McCoy stated he does not believe the zoning regulations are intending to treat the sale of puppies as a commercial kennel, as this is clearly not a commercial kennel, but is a hobby kennel. Atty. McCoy stated the State of Connecticut does not even require a license for a kennel unless you have more then 2 litters a year. Atty. McCoy stated the Henderson’s dogs have never had more then 2 litters a year, with some years having just 1 or none at all. Atty. McCoy stated you will also be hearing from a variety of people here tonight who do not have an issue
with excessive noise from this property or even notice this operation in their neighborhood. Atty. McCoy stated the real issue here is, is this what is intended under the regulations as relative to a commercial kennel and is the giving away or selling of puppies a commercial operation?
Mrs. Henderson stated she sells the dogs for $1600, but does not make a profit, because of the care the puppies receive before they are sold, such as genetic testing and veterinary bills.
The Board asked questions pertaining to the appeal.
Mr. Henderson stated he has placed a wooden fence and a barrier for sound on the property by the kennel and submitted a photo showing the kennel enclosure (Exhibit 1) and their website ad (Exhibit 2). Mr. Henderson stated the website is not an advertising tool, but a way to communicate with other breeders.
Chairman Burger asked if there was anyone from the public speaking in favor of this application. The following people spoke:
Kirsten Montgomery, 62C Patricia Avenue
Heidi Macina, 58 Miller Road
Nancy Martin, 62W Patricia Avenue
William Martin, 62W Patricia Avenue
Bill Hixson, 62M Patricia Avenue
Lynda Danz, 62A Patricia Avenue
Brad Glass, 62A Patricia Avenue
Ralph Davidson, 62D Patricia Avenue
Terry Charron, 62P Patricia Avenue
Kim Davidson, 62D Patricia Avenue
Chairman Burger asked if there was anyone from the public speaking against this application. There were none.
Chairman Burger asked if there were any general remarks or comments from the public regarding this application.
Mr. Henderson stated he has had no interaction with the complaining neighbor and has never met her.
Chairman Burger asked if the applicant would like to make a summarization or rebuttal.
Atty. McCoy stated that this is by no means a commercial kennel, these are their dogs, and they have 1 to 2 litters a year.
MOTION by C. Palmer, SECOND by J. Lord to close the Public Hearing on ZBA application #13-005. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. PENDING APPLICATIONS:
B. ZBA Application #13-005, of Douglas L. & Janet S. Henderson, 62J Patricia Ave., North Stonington, CT 06359, located on the westerly side of Patricia Ave. approximately 2,110 feet south from the intersection of Patricia Ave. with Miller Rd. in an R-80. Applicant is requesting a correction of an error in an order, requirement, or decision made by the Zoning Enforcement Officer regarding the use of the referenced property. Tax Map #45, Parcel #5863
Chairman Burger read the application into the record.
Seated: C. Burger, J. Lord, C. Palmer, H. Chrissos, V. Gregoropoulos
MOTION by C. Palmer, SECOND by V. Gregoropoulos to approve ZBA Appeal #13-005, and overturn the zoning officer’s decision, except for the requirement of a zoning and building permit for any accessory structures, given the present circumstances of the activity. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. NEW APPLICATIONS: None
6. NEW BUSINESS: None
7. OLD BUSINESS: None
8. CORRESPONDENCE: None
9. REVIEW MINUTES:
Review minutes of September 17, 2013 meeting
MOTION by C. Palmer, SECOND by J. Lord to accept the minutes of September 17, 2013 as written. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
10. ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by C. Palmer, SECOND by J. Lord to adjourn the meeting at 8:40 p.m. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Respectfully Submitted,
Cheryl Konsavitch
Cheryl Konsavitch, Administrative Assistant
Zoning Board of Appeals
| 
