Town of Old Saybrook, CT - ZBA 051006.Minutes

ZBA 051006.Minutes

MINUTES OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

MAY 10, 2006

A Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Old Saybrook was held on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 at the Pasbeshauke Pavilion located at Saybrook Point Park, 155 College Street Extension and heard the following appeals and made the following decisions:

Seated for this evenings meeting were the following members: Jan Fenger, Vice Chairman, Rex McCall, Chairman, Dorothy Alexander, Carl Garbe, alternate, Herb Weiland, alternate

Present: Christina M. Costa, Zoning Enforcement Officer, Kim Barrows, Clerk

Absent: Chris Gosselin, Secretary, Adam Stillman, Alan Fogg, alternate

The meeting was then called to order at 7:47 p.m.

The Chairman introduced the Board members who were seated for this evenings meeting. He then proceeded to read the Legal Notice into the record and outlined the order of the public hearing and the regular meeting.

The following public hearings were conducted, as well as the decision session. The meeting has been recorded on tape and the following actions were taken:

PUBLIC HEARINGS:

05/06-43 – 12 Billow Road Associates, LLC seeks a variance of Par. 10.7.1 (nonconformity/ enlargements), Par. 10.7.2 (nonconformity/ change), Par. 24.6.1 ( max gross floor area), Par. 24.6.2 ( max bldg./structure coverage), Par. 53.6.1 C (SE/Conversion of Dwellings/changes to exterior of dwelling) and Par. 53.6.1 D (SE/Conversion of Dwellings/stairways leading to second floor within dwelling) of the Zoning Regulations to permit accessory buildings, swimming pool and other ancillary structures on property located at 12 Billow Road (Cornfield Point), Map No. 82, Lot No. 4.

Present: Attorney John Beck, 150 Trumbull Street, Hartford, agent for the applicant; Cal Cody, Builder

Attorney Beck gave a presentation as to how the “castle” will be divided into two condominium units. Actually they will be two single family residences granted by special exception in the Zoning Regulations. The Architectural Review Board approved the structure and concept. The project will need variances for six zoning regulations and the attorney went over the variances that were needed. The applicant wants to add garages (3 car) for each unit, a tower for an entry stairway and rehab the entire basement. The Architect, George Fellner went over the architectural plans for the project, the septic plan and the landscaping plan. He also pointed out all the improvements to be made in the basement area, i.e. spa, gym, wine cellar, dog washing area. The renderings of the project were shown to the audience and the Board. Attorney Beck stated that applicants are trying to protect the historic integrity of the building. He also gave a brief history of how the land was acquired and handed out several documents, one of which stated that the building could not be demolished. The reasons for granting the variances are that applicant intends to conserve the value of the building and the health, safety and welfare of the community will be enhanced since the building will no longer be vacant and continue to deteriorate. Also the castle is part of the “color” of Old Saybrook. The property is “unique” from any other property in Old Saybrook. Applicant feels that this use is a good use for the property. There was discussion about what would happen if the variances were not granted. The castle was nominated to be on the historic registry but the previous owner did not accept the nomination. There was further discussion about placing the garages under the castle but the architect felt it would compromise the integrity of the structure. J. Fenger asked about the walkway in front of the castle, it was determined that the walkway does not extend in front of the castle. J. Fenger also stated that the previous owner took down a portion of the castle that had apartments and garages. Again the hardship stated that in order to use property as a residential dwelling it needs to have garages and economically it also needs both units with three car garages. J. Fenger felt that statement constituted a financial hardship. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or opposition. There was no one in favor of the project. Several spoke in opposition or had concerns. Ted Libby of Gates Road, asked about market price for each unit and if variances not granted, the property will be sold back to the previous owner as stated by Attorney Beck. Kathy (didn’t get her last name) of 11 Billow Road asked about the Gate house and yes it is to remain. She is also concerned about the property being a condominium. The ZEO stated that this proposal if the variances were granted would still have to go back to the Zoning Commission. Paula Satmary of 6 Fox Lane is opposed and stated that there are no “two family” dwellings in Cornfield Point and asked about the classification of this property whether it would be two family, condominium, etc. Mary Mazziott of 24 Billow Road was also in opposition. There was no further audience participation and no further Board comments. The public hearing closed at 9:20 p.m.

05/06-44– Corey Fox seeks a variance of Par. 10.6.1 (nonconformity/use/enlargement), Par. 10.6.2 (nonconformity/use/change), Par. 24.6.1 ( max gross floor area), Par. 24.6.2 ( max bldg./structure coverage), Par. 24.5.3 (setback/other property line), Par. 24.5.5b (setback/accessory bldg/rear property line) and Par. 24.5.5c (setback/accessory bldg/other property line) of the Zoning Regulations to permit addition and replacement of accessory building on property located at 75 Middletown Avenue (Saybrook Manor), Map No. 19, Lot No. 187.

Present: Mr. Diorio of Base Line Surveying, agent for the applicant.

Mr Diorio gave a brief presentation. The plans submitted did not exactly depict what the applicant wanted to do. Discussion as to raising up the building and putting on a second floor addition. Or raising a portion of the building, i.e. the addition. The Board wanted to see floor plans since they felt the proposal was hard to picture.

The Board discussed that it was hard to interpret what the applicant wanted to do since the applicant did not include floor plans with his application. The survey submitted could not accurately convey what the applicant intended. Discussion of the wood shed being taken down and then replaced.

A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by D. Alexander to CONTINUE the Public Hearing on 05/06-44 - Fox to the JUNE 14, 2006 REGULAR MEETING so that the applicant and or his agent can provide the Board with floor plans and consider reducing the size of the shed. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, J. Fenger, D. Alexander, C. Garbe, H. Weiland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0

05/06-45C– Richard R. Hanratty, Jr. And Kathryn V. Hanratty seek a variance of Par. 10.7.1 (nonconformity/ enlargements), Par. 10.7.2 (nonconformity/ change) and Par. 24.5.3 (setback/other property line) of the Zoning Regulations to permit a second story addition and replacement of the garage on property located at 13 Cromwell Place (Saybrook Point), Map No. 24, Lot No. 29.

Present: Mr. Richard Hanratty, applicant.

The dwelling was built approximately 60 years ago. The garage is deteriorating and the applicant would like to replace it where it stands but add 7 feet more to the length and reduce the width by .5 feet thereby reducing the nonconformity. Mr. Hanratty would also like to add a second story over the existing footprint. Currently this house is the smallest on the block and will remain the smallest even after the addition. There was some discussion as to the placement of the garage. The hardship is that the lot is very narrow but deep. The proposal is in harmony with the neighborhood and there is a slight existing encroachment with the existing footprint. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or opposition. There was no audience participation and no further Board comments. The public hearing closed at 9:45 p.m.

05/06-46– Edward T. & Joan Stave, et al seek a variance of Par. 10.7.1 (nonconformity/ enlargements), Par.10.8.2 (nonconformity/lots), Par.10.8.4 (nonconformity/lots) and Par. 24.6.2 (max bldg./structure coverage) of the Zoning Regulations to permit an addition on existing single family dwelling on property located at 46 Mohican Road (Cornfield Point), Map No. 1, Lot Nos. 31 & 32.

Present: William A. Childress, Esquire, agent for the applicants; Mr. & Mrs. Stave, applicants.

Attorney Childress gave a brief presentation. The dwelling is a year round dwelling and applicants would like to move here year round. There property consists of two lots but the house was built on one of the lots and that is why it does not meet the current regulations. A small portion of the deck will be removed and one of the sheds that is the most nonconforming will be removed. The only substantive variance is the lot coverage. There are currently three bedrooms and the floor plans indicate a ramp. The hardship is that there is no additional adjacent contiguous land available to make the lot larger. The coverage increase is the minimal. The proposal is consistent with the neighborhood. Attorney Childress submitted a petition with 11 signatures in favor of the project. The petition is on file. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or opposition. The Board had some questions. R. McCall asked about the hardship “reasonable use of property”. Attorney Childress stated that a person ought to be able to enjoy the property. There will be no impact on views and there will be a separation distance of over 15' from the neighbor. D. Alexander asked about cutting down the size, she feels there are was of still reducing the ground coverage. Mrs. Stave felt they needed the extra area in the garage for the ramp. There was no audience participation and no further Board comments. The public hearing closed at 10:02 p.m.

05/06-47– Alfred Chiulli seeks a variance of Par. 10.7.1 (nonconformity/enlargements), Par.10.8.2 (nonconformity/lots), Par. 24.5.3 (setback/other property line) and Par. 24.6.2 ( max bldg./structure coverage) of the Zoning Regulations to permit construction of small additions, addition of second floor, removal of decks and raising of structure to meet flood elevations on property located at 27 Beach Road West (Chalker Beach), Map No. 12, Lot No. 154.

A letter dated May 10, 2006 from Attorney Christina Burnham the agent for the applicant requesting that the variance application be withdrawn.

05/06-48C– Rob & Joanne Gagne seek a variance of Par. 7.4.10 (special setbacks from wetlands) of the Zoning Regulations to permit deck/screened porch on property located at 11 Beach View Avenue (Chalker Beach), Map No. 18, Lot No. 109.

Present: Mr. Gagne, the applicant

Mr. Gagne gave a brief presentation. The deck is encroaching into the tidal wetland setback but the deck is up on the air, not sitting on ground level. They would like to enjoy the outdoor porch by having it screened in since the outdoors is buggy. The only setback required is for the tidal wetlands. There is a 10' encroachment into the setback on both sides. Also applicant needs a rear exit out of the house and the deck with stairs will provide that. This will not be an all season porch. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or opposition. There was no audience participation and no further Board comments. The public hearing closed at 10:17 p.m.

REGULAR MEETING (DECISION MAKING PORTION ):

Discussion with respect to the Public Hearing that closed this evening. The Board discussed the ground coverage and floor space. They also discussed deferring the decision to next month since there was a lot to think about. J. Fenger felt the Board could decide the matter this evening. Extensive discussion on whether the structure could be raised in order to accommodate the garages underneath the castle rather than have the three car garages add to the ground coverage. The Board did feel that the additions did lessen the impact of the structure somewhat. R. McCall felt the proposal shown this evening gave a better appearance and that this was a unique situation. J. Fenger felt that this was one interpretation of the property and another one could come along not having so much bulk. In this situation, this parcel is not in harmony with the rest of the neighborhood. H. Weiland felt that this was a self created hardship since the entity who sold the parcel to the applicant split off lots from the larger parcel and left the castle on the smaller lot.

A Motion was made by D. Alexander, seconded by C. Garbe to GRANT 05/06-43 - 12 Billow Road Associates, LLC. The property is very unique and warrants the variances that have been requested and it is in keeping with the Zoning Regulations. The hardship is the uniqueness of the situation and in order to make it viable the variances need to be granted. Discussion: R. McCall feels even though there is some question re the hardships but the property is unique and in order to save it the variances are necessary. J. Fenger feels we would be going along with the financial hardship of the matter. H. Weiland felt the threat of tearing it down, was it correct, no. R. McCall feels the property does have historic value. No further discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, C. Garbe Opposed: J. Fenger, H. Weiland Abstaining: None The motion failed to carry. It was DENIED 3-2-0

Discussion with respect to the Public Hearing that closed this evening. The proposal as submitted was altered to show the garage width being reduced from 22' to 20' per the Sanitarian’s report. Also no additional bedrooms to be added. The home currently is a three bedroom home. Discussion as to this house, as it currently stands, is not in harmony with the neighborhood. It is much smaller than the homes in the area. When the house is expanded, it will conform to the neighborhood.

A Motion was made by C. Garbe, seconded by R. McCall to GRANT 05/06-45C - Hanratty. Sufficient hardship shown. There will be no increase in bedrooms and the garage will be reduced in width from 22' to 20'. The CAM application accompanying the variance request is approved. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, J. Fenger, D. Alexander, C. Garbe, H. Weiland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0

Discussion with respect to the Public Hearing that closed this evening. The Board felt that this proposal was a considerable increase in the ground coverage. Ground coverage going from 18.6% to 25%. The Board discussed cutting back the foyer and possibly eliminating the opening between the master bedroom and the bathroom. They felt the proposal could be re-designed and the ground coverage decreased further. The Board felt it was hard to justify granting a variance with a 6% increase in the ground coverage.

A Motion was made by D. Alexander, seconded by C. Garbe to DENY 05/06-46 - Stave. This proposal is a large increase in the ground coverage and there are ways to add the addition without increasing the ground coverage by that much. Discussion: The Board was reluctant to deny but still could not justify the increase in the ground coverage. No further discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, J. Fenger, D. Alexander, C. Garbe, H. Weiland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0

Discussion with respect to the Public Hearing that closed this evening. The Board felt that the 10' encroachment on the tidal wetlands was not a threat to the wetlands. The deck will be elevated and placed on piers so that it complies with the flood regulations. The wetlands are on both sides of the property and encroaches on both sides only the 10'.

A Motion was made by J. Fenger, seconded by C. Garbe to GRANT 05/06-48C - Gagne. Since the deck is raised it does not pose a threat to the wetlands and is in harmony with the house. The CAM application accompanying the variance request is approved. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, J. Fenger, D. Alexander, C. Garbe, H. Weiland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0

New Business:

1) A Letter dated May 5, 2006 from Attorney William Childress, agent for Cherokee Hill, LLC, requesting an extension of time re issuance of the building permit. A variance was granted in August, 2005 and a SE was granted in November, 2005.

A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by C. Garbe to GRANT a one year extension from November 9, 2005 to November 9, 2006 for Cherokee Hill, LLC in order to obtain a building permit. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, J. Fenger, D. Alexander, C. Garbe, H. Weiland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0

2) Christina Costa, the ZEO asked the Board to schedule a Special Meeting to hold a workshop to review the newly drafted ZBA Guidelines. The consensus of the Board was to schedule the Special Meeting for Wednesday, May 17, 2006 in the second floor conference room of the Town Hall at 6:30 p.m.

Minutes: A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by J. Fenger to approve the Minutes of the April 12, 2006 Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, J. Fenger, D. Alexander, C. Garbe, H. Weiland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0

Adjournment: A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by D. Alexander to adjourn the May 10, 2006 Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, J. Fenger, D. Alexander, C. Garbe, H. Weiland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0 The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m.

The next Regular Meeting of the ZBA will be on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. at the Pavilion.

Respectfully submitted,

Kim N. Barrows, Clerk

Old Saybrook Zoning Board of Appeals

Old Saybrook, Connecticut 06475