 |
MINUTES OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 10, 2008
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Old Saybrook at its Regular Meeting that was held on Wednesday, September 10, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. at the Pasbeshauke Pavilion, 155 College Street Extension, heard and decided the following appeals:
Seated for this evenings meeting and voting were the following members: Rex McCall, Chairman, Dorothy Alexander, Vice Chairman, Julius Castagno, Chris Gosselin, Joan Strickland
Present: Christina Costa, Zoning Enforcement Officer and Kim Barrows, Clerk
Absent: Allan Fogg, alternate, Brian Dooley, alternate, Wendy Farah, alternate
The meeting was then called to order at 7:30 p.m.
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:
The Chairman introduced the Board members who were seated for this evenings meeting. The Chairman then proceeded to read the Legal Notice into the record and outlined the order of the public hearing and the regular meeting.
The Chairman, R. McCall, asked if the members would be agreeable to modifying the Agenda to hear an appeal and then decide on that appeal. The reason is that since there are several appeals on the Agenda tonight, if the Board had to continue to another night and some members were not available, the appeal could be heard and decided with those members present on that particular night. It would also allow the audience members to be present and heard and not sit here all evening waiting for a decision or have to come back another night. The Board members agreed.
A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by C. Gosselin to vary the Agenda to hear the appeal and then decide the appeal. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: D. Alexander, C. Gosselin, R. McCall, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
08/09-03C – Richard and Marion Mazzella seek a variance of Par.10.7.1 (nonconformity/ improvements/ enlargement), Par. 23.5.1 as modified by Par. 7.4.4 (No. Cove Road) (street line setback 43.5' req./12.8' proposed/balcony 11.8') and Par. 23.5.1 (Cromwell Place) (streetline setback 35' req./3' garage extension to 15.8' from property line)of the Zoning Regulations to permit removal of non-historic portions of existing dwelling and relocate and replace them with a two story addition, also expansion of the existing garage by approximately three feet by relocating its westerly wall and expanding the interior on property located at 174 North Cove Road (North Cove Historic District), Map No. 32, Lot No. 17.
Present: Attorney David Royston, agent for the applicants; Mr. & Mrs. Mazzella, applicants.
Attorney Royston gave a brief presentation. Attorney Royston introduced into the record the Conn. River Gateway Commission letter dated September 4, 2008 that stated it found at their August 28, 2008 “that they do not oppose the granting of the streetline setback variances as requested.” He also presented photos showing the house and the proximity to the river, along with the approved “Certificate of Appropriateness” from the North Cove Historic District. The project was also approved by the Health District. Attorney Royston then went on to give the history of the property and how the main existing structure was constructed in 1799 by Captain Lynde which was a two story house. Then in the 1800's the house became a 3 story house and so on, eventually resulting in an “L”
addition used as a bake house. Attorney Royston then went over the variances requested. The house is situated on a corner lot and the non-historic additions are partially located within the setback but they will be removed. The other 3' setback is for the existing garage, which will not be moved but enlarged towards the Cromwell Court. There will be no removal of any trees. The original proposal prior to submission to the North Cove Historic District had a balcony on the front, this balcony has been removed in order to make it more in “character” with the North Cove Historic District. The proposed new addition is 2 ½ stories with a height to 27'. It will be placed no closer than the existing house and the existing house within the setbacks. The hardship is the configuration of the house on the lot, the corner lot with narrow streetline setbacks. The proposal is in keeping with the purpose and the intent of the
regulations. Attorney Royston entered into the record a letter from Willard Restorations dated July 5, 2008 from Mr. Howard A. Willard, Jr. Which states that the design is in keeping with the historic nature of the dwelling and “this is also accomplished by the setback of the proposed wing from the existing Connecticut River facade.” It was noted that this application will have to go to Zoning for a Special Exception permit. R. McCall asked if the addition could be moved. Attorney Royston stated that historic portions of the house would then be removed. Also it would need to go back to the North Cove Historic District for its approval. C. Gosselin asked about the location of the septic systems. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or in opposition. There was no audience participation and no further Board comments. The public hearing closed at 8:04 p.m.
Deliberation:
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. R. McCall stated that if the applicant were to move the addition, it would have to go back to the North Cove Historic District for its approval. The house as it exists encroaches into the setback, since it was built well before zoning regulations. The Gateway Commission did not oppose the granting of the streetline variance on this appeal. D. Alexander has a problem with the addition since it is almost half the existing house and is a large encroachment into the road. J. Strickland likes the addition and how it integrates into the house. D. Alexander feels there is also a hardship issue here, there isn’t one.
A Motion was made by C. Gosselin, seconded by J. Castagno to GRANT Application No. 08/09-03C -Mazzella. The proposal is certainly in harmony with the neighborhood, the configuration of the house on the property does impose an unusual hardship to the property. This variance does not substantially affect the comprehensive zoning plan and strict adherence with the zoning ordinance would cause unusual hardship in this particular case unnecessary for carrying out the general purpose of our zoning plan and this appeal is not in conflict with the purposes set forth in the Old Saybrook zoning regulations. The CAM is approved. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: C. Gosselin, R. McCall, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Opposed: D. Alexander Abstaining: None The
motion passed. 4-1-0
08/09-04 – Andrew J. and Leslie L. Stratton seek a variance of Par.10.7.1 (nonconformity/ improvements/ enlargement), Par.10.8.2 (nonconformity/lots), Par.10.8.4 (nonconformity/lots), Par. 24.3.1 modified by Par. 10.8.3 (minimum lot area), Par. 24.3.2 a (minimum dimension of square), Par. 24.3.3 (minimum frontage/50' required/40' proposed), Par. 24.3.4 (minimum width along bldg. line), Par. 24.5.1 (Mohican)(streetline setback/30' required/12.9' proposed), Par. 7.4.4 (Wildwood) (narrow street setback/30' required/19.5' required) and Par. 24.5.2 (setback/rear property line /15' required/4.0' proposed) of the Zoning Regulations to permit demolition of existing year-round single family dwelling with detached garage and construction of new year-round dwelling (no garage) on property located at 2 Mohican Road (14 Wildwood Road), Map
No. 3, Lot No. 198.
Present: William A. Childress, agent for the applicants; Mr. & Mrs. Stratton, applicants and Rick Staub of Point One Architects
Attorney Childress stated how the public hearing was held open due to a difference in the actual floor coverage calculated on the plan to what was noted on the plan. It appears that the third floor square footage (372 s.f.) was not included in the floor area coverage and therefore it exceeds the allowed 40%. A variance for the floor coverage was not asked for at the time of the application. The applicants at that time requested a continuance to recalculate the ground coverage. The applicants and Point One revised the site plan and the house plans. The floor area now conforms to the regulations. Mr. Staub then went over the floor plans. The ground coverage from the last plan went from 19.5% to 20% which is the maximum ground coverage allowed. The house, as designed, is only 1,500 s.f. and the height
of the dwelling will be 32' 2". Attorney Childress went over the Health District approval, and is resubmitting it to the Health District since the design has been changed. This proposal has less “volume”. The letter from Diane Clark dated September 10, 2008 was read into the record. Attorney Childress reiterated that last month several letters were read into the record in support of the project. D. Alexander stated that the proposal fits the neighborhood. The setbacks already exist now and the design is slightly improved. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or in opposition. Mr. Thomas Karanda of 12 Wildwood Road spoke in opposition and read his letter into the record (letter on file). Mr. Karanda has several concerns and feels proposal not in harmony with the area since the homes are all seasonal cottages. C. Gosselin felt Mr. Karanda brought up several good points, but
the regulations state that the height can be 35'. Discussion as to whether the Zoning Commission should have different regulations for the beach communities. Mr. Chet Mounts of 1 Wildwood Road spoke in favor; Mr. Joseph Arcari of 4 & 6 Wildwood also spoke in favor. There was no further audience participation and no further Board comments. The public hearing closed at 8:47 p.m.
Deliberation:
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. The variances that are requested are those the Board encountered when a house is torn down and the lot requalified. The project is in harmony with the neighborhood. There will no further encroachments than those that already exist. There will be a new septic system. J. Strickland stated that the original plan had more square footage, this new design is smaller. The Board has no control over the height requirement as long as the applicant does not exceed 35 feet. C. Gosselin sees an improvement in public health due to new septic system and there is a subtle reduction in the conformities. C. Gosselin feels there should be different standards in the beach areas.
A Motion was made by C. Gosselin, seconded by D. Alexander to GRANT Application No. 08/09-04 -Stratton. The appeal is in harmony with the neighborhood, there has been a reduction, as slight as is may be in the footprint, or in the setbacks of the property and I think it should be approved and like I read in my last appeal and I think these three paragraphs apply here as well. This variance does not substantially affect the comprehensive zoning plan and strict adherence with the zoning ordinance would cause unusual hardship in this particular case unnecessary for carrying out the general purpose of our zoning plan and this appeal is not in conflict with the purposes set forth in the Old Saybrook zoning regulations. I would also like to add that the applicant will also be responsible for providing an As-built
survey to be executed by their engineer of choice here for the basement footprint prior to the erection of any framing materials to prove that it is in full compliance with the setbacks that they have indicated on this plan. This will give our Zoning Enforcement Officer the proper tools to make sure that this is done per specification and that it does not accidentally encroach on anyone’s property line. And that approval of the Regional Health District for this plan would be required due to the change in setback and building design. For the record the plan is dated July 8, 2008, revised to September 4, 2008, titled Andrew B. Stratton and Leslie L. Stratton, job No. listed as a reference 085497, plan drafted by Angus McDonald. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: D. Alexander, C. Gosselin, R. McCall, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
08/09-05C – Colleen D. Lallier, Trustee seeks a variance of Par. 58.2.2 (Riparian Buffer Area/Gateway Conservation Zone) and Par. 58.6 (setback/Gateway Conservation Zone/100' from associated wetlands of the CT River required/proposed 96' from South Cove and 51' from associated wetlands on the NW side of lot) of the Zoning Regulations to permit demolition of existing year-round single family dwelling and construction of new year-round single family residential dwelling with detached garage on property located at 14 Mulberry Street (South Cove), Map No. 24, Lot No. 5.
Present: Attorney David Royston, agent for the applicant; Ms. Colleen Lallier, applicant
Attorney Royston gave a brief presentation and discussed the Gateway Commission regulations. This property is located in the Gateway area and a 100' foot riparian buffer needs to be maintained on the property. The existing house is slightly in this buffer area, which buffer area represents a “no construction zone”. A letter dated September 4, 2008 from the Conn. River Gateway Commission was entered into the record and listed its recommendations. At this time, Attorney Royston stated that the new plans submitted reflect the recommendations outlined in the September 4th letter. A plan showing the vegetative buffer and a planting schedule was submitted for the record. Attorney Royston also stated for the record that the applicant purchased this property 5 years ago, prior to the
enactment of the Gateway Regulations, with the intent to renovate the house. The variances requested were discussed and also the visual impact of the property on South Cove. Attorney Royston showed the Board a colored rendering of the proposal and stated that there would be minimal grading. The project was approved by the Health District. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or in opposition. Mr. Al Bonadies, who is an abutter, spoke in favor. There was no further audience participation and no further Board comments. The public hearing closed at 9:25 p.m.
Deliberation:
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. R. McCall in favor of granting with the conditions recommended by the Connecticut River Gateway Commission in its letter dated September 4, 2008. The hardship is the 100' buffer cutting into the building area. The house is in need of repair since it has not been occupied for 7 years.
A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by D. Alexander to GRANT w/condition Application No. 08/09-05C -Lallier. Conditioned upon the property owner planting environmentally appropriate riparian buffer vegetation as shown on a plan submitted to us dated March 24, 2008, revised to September 10, 2008, said plan identified as job no. 085640. The hardships are clear, unique hardship, buffer eliminates 70% of what otherwise would be building area on the lot and the new riparian buffer regulations which were not in place when applicant purchased the property with the intent to replace the structure. The CAM is approved since it meets the standards. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: D. Alexander, C. Gosselin, R. McCall, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Opposed: None
Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
08/09-06 – DJB Construction, LLC seeks a variance of Par.10.7.1 (nonconformity/ improvements/ enlargement), Par.10.8.2 (nonconformity/lots), Par.10.8.4 (nonconformity/lots), Par. 24.3.1 modified by Par. 10.8.3 (minimum lot area), Par. 24.3.2 a (minimum dimension of square), Par. 24.3.4 (minimum width along bldg. line) and Par. 24.5.1 (streetline setback/30' required/proposed 23.2' Bayview/14.7' Oyster Point) of the Zoning Regulations to permit demolition of existing single family dwelling with attached garage and construction of new year-round dwelling (no garage) on property located at 4 Bayview Avenue, Map No. 14, Lot No. 137.
Present: Attorney William A. Childress, agent for the applicant; Mr. Dan Beaudoin, applicant.
Attorney Childress gave a brief recap of the concerns from last month’s meeting. A driveway plan was submitted for the approval of the Board since public hearing was held open in order to provide for additional parking. The parking issue on the street was a major concern to the neighbors. The Board reviewed the plan and felt that the applicant provided sufficient off-street parking. Attorney Childress stated the hardship is the narrow shape of the lot, the wetlands in the rear along with two narrow street setbacks, all which limit building area. There was some discussion about the “½ story”, it will not be habitable, it will only be for the mechanicals since the mechanicals will not be located on the ground floor due to the flood elevation. The foot print is being reduced slightly and
the coverages are all within the allowed percentages. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or in opposition. There was no audience participation and no further Board comments. The public hearing closed at 9:45 p.m.
Deliberation:
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. The parking issue has been addressed. The applicant provided a plan outlining where the parking will be on the property. The hardship is that there are wetlands on the corner of the property. The lot is unique, it is long and narrow and is on the corner of two narrow streets which decreases the building area. The coverage is within the allowed percentages.
A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by J. Strickland to GRANT Application No. 08/09-06 -DJB Construction, LLC. To construct a new home as requested. Hardship being the existing narrow lot on the corner of two narrow roads, the location of the septic system and the proximity of the interior wetlands area limiting any new construction which is required due to the deterioration of the existing home. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: D. Alexander, C. Gosselin, R. McCall, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
08/09-08C – Richard D. and Mary D. Epifanio seek a variance of Par.10.7.1 (nonconformity/ improvements/ enlargement), Par.10.8.2 (nonconformity/lots), Par.10.8.4 (nonconformity/lots), Par. 24.3.1 modified by Par. 10.8.3 (minimum lot area), Par. 24.3.2 a (minimum dimension of square), Par. 24.3.4 (minimum width along bldg. line), Par. 24.5.1 modified by Par. 7.4.4 (narrow street) (streetline setback/30' required/15.3' proposed) and Par. 24.5.3 (setback/other /15' required/5.9' proposed) of the Zoning Regulations to permit removal of all but facade of existing dwelling and construct new year-round single family dwelling on property located at 43 Indianola Drive, Map No. 2, Lot No. 61.
Present: Attorney William A. Childress, agent for the applicant; Mr. & Mrs. Epifanio
Attorney Childress gave a brief presentation. This is an existing home and the proposal is to remove all but the stone facade. The lot is 19,000 s.f. +/- with 10,382 s.f. of uplands. Approximately 9,000 s.f. of tidal wetlands, which is located on a narrow street. There is also an easement for the neighbor across the property for a septic system. Two different flood zones run up the middle of the property, which creates a very unique situation. With the removal of the existing house, the lot has to be “re-qualified” and that is the reason for the number of variances requested. The Board discussed the placement of the house on the lot. There is also a new septic system to be installed. A form letter in favor of the project was signed by the following abutters: Marie Rizzio of
10 Gates Road; Joanne Civitillo of 4 Pratt Road; Marc DeLise of 78 Town Beach Road. A letter dated September 5, 2008 from Bobi Molchan and Bear Holcome, in favor; Joanne M. Desjardins of 10 Ridge Road, in favor; Charlotte and Robert Buchas of 39 Indianola Drive, in favor; Jean F. Cronin of 190 Plum Bank Road, in favor; Donald and Elizabeth Olivieri of 21 Wildwood Road, in favor; Marjorie W. Jolidon of 51 Sea Breeze Road, in favor. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or in opposition. There was no audience participation and no further Board comments. The public hearing closed at 9:45 p.m.
Deliberation:
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. The applicants will be keeping the stone facade and rebuilding a 4 bedroom home with a new septic system. The hardship is on the ground itself with the wetlands line, the flood zone line running down the middle of the property with two different zones on either side, the placement of the house on the lot and an easement granted to the neighbor for their septic. This lot is unique and a variance would need to be granted for any work done on the property.
A Motion was made by J. Castagno, seconded by J. Strickland to GRANT Application No. 08/09-8C -Epifanio. The hardship is the combination of the narrow street, wetlands, the flood zone and the easement for neighbors septic system and also the unusual shape of the lot. There will be improvement to the public health with the code compliant septic system. The plan dated July 30, 2007 revised to July 14, 2008 prepared by Angus McDonald as Job No. 044994 is the plan approved. The applicant will provide an As-built survey to the ZEO showing the foundation. The CAM is also approved. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: D. Alexander, C. Gosselin, R. McCall, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously.
5-0-0
08/09-09 – Saybrook Point Inn seeks a variance of Par. 64.5.6 A (signs/multiple tenant on one site) of the Zoning Regulations to permit multiple signs at property corner on property located at 2 Bridge Street, Map No. 24, Lot No. 45.
Present: Jonathan Turley, agent for the applicant; Steve Tagliatelli, applicant
Mr. Turley gave a presentation stating how they would like to combine three tenant signs into one landscape feature to be located at the northwest corner of the site. The existing wooden sign is 7'10" in height. The proposed wall would be made of river stone and the middle section would be 14" and the sides at a 45 degree angle would be 7' in height. There was discussion regarding the pertinent sign regulations to be varied and the actual square footage of the sign. The applicant went to ARB and that Board asked that the sign be scaled down. There will be soft LED lighting, which will not be as harsh as the lighting on the current sign. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or in opposition. There was no audience participation and no further Board
comments. The public hearing closed at 10:59 p.m.
Deliberation:
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. The Board members went back and forth regarding the square footage of the “signage” since the stone wall is an integral part of the design since it incorporates the three sign designs. C. Costa went over the regulations for signage in that district. The final calculation, including the three signs and wall, resulted in 136 s.f. of signage. The applicant went before the Architectural Review Board and that Board continued the hearing until September 22nd so that the applicants could scale down the size of the sign (mostly the center “SP” design of the sign and the lighting, as relayed by Mr. Turley). The applicant felt the size of the sign, as designed, was appropriate due to the distance from the stop
signs and cars passing the sign could read the information. But they will present a slightly scaled down version of the existing sign to the ARB at its next meeting. Mr. Turley discussed the LED lighting and how it would be softer than the existing lighting. In the event the light spilled or washed over onto other properties, it would be absorbed by the fir trees. The Board felt that the design presented or even the design approved by the ARB would still need the requested variances, the Board opted to vote on the matter this evening.
A Motion was made by C. Gosselin, seconded by R. McCall to GRANT Application No. 08/09-09 -Saybrook Point Inn. The proposed sign located in the northwest section of the property and that the approved design is on drawing A-1 dated July 29, 2008, Title Plan: Saybrook Point Inn Main Entry Sign. The sign should be 140 square feet or less in total area to include the stone and any logos, that the lighting proposed should be LED in type to be appropriate for lighting such a sign and should not create a wash or a situation where light would cast on abutting properties to create a nuisance. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: C. Gosselin, R. McCall, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Opposed: None Abstaining: D. Alexander The motion passed. 4-0-1
Dorothy Alexander if she could have the floor to say something prior to the opening of the next public hearing.
D. Alexander: In order to make informed decisions regarding appeals that come before us, each of us, all volunteers, inspects the properties on the agenda.
Many here, as well as most of the attorneys who regularly appear before us, have heard me comment on the burden to us volunteers presented by missing house numbers on properties that we intend to inspect. It is rank imposition on us, I feel, an irritating waste of our time. The property on tonight’s Agenda, identified as 27 Red Bird Trail, represented by Attorney Childress, has no house number. While it’s perfectly true that we can almost always figure out which property is the one we’re there to look at, the point is that it takes extra time and effort to do this, and that shouldn’t be required of us. In an effort to stop this disregard for ZBA members’ time, I move that the hearing on No. 27 Red Bird Trail not be opened tonight on the grounds of my being unable to locate with
certainty the subject parcel. A second was made by J. Castagno. Discussion: R. McCall, The point has been well made that we find it quite annoying that house numbers are not in place since the Town adopted an Ordinance for house numbers. I would ask that counsel before us ensure that his applicants have house numbers. Attorney Childress said he would. R. McCall said he didn’t think the hearing should be postponed. C. Gosselin said he agreed with D. Alexander, but he did not think the applicant should be penalized at this late hour by being hit with this tonight. J. Strickland feels we need to instruct the public that if we need to go to their home, the application should say you need a house number, if not, don’t show up because it will be postponed. J. Castagno stated he just seconded the motion to emphasize that we want this done. It is hard driving up and down a street to find the house, its as simple as putting a
number on the house. R. McCall: all those in favor not to hold the meeting for this applicant: D. Alexander Opposed: R. McCall, C. Gosselin, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Abstaining: None The motion did not pass. 1-4-0 The hearing will be held.
08/09-10C – Kathryn Galanto and Bart Bozzi seek a variance of Par.10.8.2 (nonconformity/lots), Par.10.8.4 (nonconformity/lots), Par. 24.3.1 modified by Par. 10.8.3 (minimum lot area), Par. 24.3.2 a (minimum dimension of square), Par. 24.3.4 (minimum width along bldg. line), Par. 24.5.1 as modified by Par. 7.4.4 (narrow street) (streetline setback/30' required/proposed 15.3'), Par. 24.5.3 (setback/other /15' required/13.0' west/7.6' east proposed) and Par. 24.6.2 (maximum building structure coverage) of the Zoning Regulations to permit demolition of existing seasonal three bedroom single family dwelling and construction of new two bedroom year-round single family dwelling with new septic and compliant with flood ordinance on property located at 27 Red Bird Trail (Indiantown), Map No. 13, Lot No. 21.
Present: Attorney William A. Childress, agent for the applicants; Mr. & Mrs. Galanto, applicants
Attorney Childress gave a brief presentation. This is a small lot with a three bedroom, seasonal home on it which is not in compliance with the flood ordinance. The proposal is for a new two bedroom, flood compliant home with a new septic system. Attorney Childress went over the reasons for “re-qualifying” the lot once a structure is removed. There are wetlands to the north of the property, the lot is small and there is a narrow street setback. The applicant proposes decking on the house to provide reasonable views, there will be a reduction in the number of bedrooms and there is no contiguous land available to make the lot larger. The following letters were entered in support: Geraldine Uricchio of 23 Red Bird Trail; Hans and Henrietta Stargardter. Ann Tumavicis of 27 Pequot Trail has
concerns re the septic. The Board discussed the project and R. McCall stated that he could not approve the variances since he felt the deck encroached too close to the road. He was concerned more about the deck than he was about the project being over on ground coverage. The other homes in the area do not have a deck on the front. The other homes line up but this home will have the deck protruding into the road. There was discussion as to ingress and egress. The Board looked at the site plan and asked the applicants if they could move the house back 5 or 10 feet to the rear in order to keep the front deck. Attorney Childress stated that the Health District approved the plan as submitted. There is a septic tank in the back as well as the tidal wetlands line. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or in opposition. Marybeth Farrell, an abutting property owner had concerns about a retaining wall,
runoff and septic. There was no further audience participation and no further Board comments. Attorney Childress asked his clients if they would be agreeable to continuing the public hearing in order to go to the Health District and see if it is possible to move the house back. The consensus of the Board, with the plan submitted to them tonight, was not inclined to grant the variances due to the deck protrusion.
A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by C. Gosselin to CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING to OCTOBER 8, 2008 on Application No. 08/09-10C -Galanto/Bozzi. The applicant will discuss with the Health District if it is possible to move the house to the rear. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: D. Alexander, C. Gosselin, R. McCall, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
REGULAR MEETING:
At this time, J. Strickland asked the Chairman if she could make a motion regarding house numbering. The Chairman stated she could. Joan made a Motion that for future reference that notice is given if the house number is not present for us to be able to do our inspection we will postpone the hearing. C. Gosselin, said just vote no. J. Castagno, isn’t there an ordinance? C. Costa said yes. J. Strickland says we would not be canceling them, the Board would be postponing them. C. Costa says we should have a motion to discuss this with counsel. This motion was never seconded. After lengthy discussion this motion was WITHDRAWN.
Minutes: A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by C. Gosselin to approve the Minutes of the August 13, 2008 Regular Meeting. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: D. Alexander, R. McCall, C. Gosselin, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
Staff Report: C. Costa, the Zoning Enforcement Officer brought to the Board’s attention the Hackling application, 07/08-29C, 116 Sea Lane. The abutting neighbor submitted a letter to the ZEO stating the applicant is in violation of the approval granted by the Board. His concern is that the placement of the foundation is not where the Board approved it, since the southerly line now has shifted. C. Costa is asking the Board to review the foundation plan prepared by Arthur Barden, a licensed surveyor, and decide if it is within the intent of the motion the Board granted C. Gosselin felt the foundation was placed as close to what is humanly possible to the drawing approved.
A Motion was made by C. Gosselin, seconded by D. Alexander to state for the record that the As-Built survey, entitled Foundation Plan, prepared by Arthur Barden, a Licensed Surveyor, dated September 5, 2008 with the dimensions on it, meets the intent of the motion made for the variance granted on Application No. 07/08-29C - Hackling, 116 Sea Lane. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: D. Alexander, C. Gosselin, R. McCall, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
Adjournment: A Motion was made by J. Strickland, seconded by D. Alexander to adjourn the September 10, 2008 Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: D. Alexander, R. McCall, C. Gosselin, J. Castagno, J. Strickland Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0 The meeting was adjourned at 12:15 a.m.
The next Regular Meeting of the ZBA will be on Wednesday, October 8, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. at the Pasbeshauke Pavilion, 155 College Street Extension.
Respectfully submitted,
Kim N. Barrows, Clerk
Old Saybrook Zoning Board of Appeals
Old Saybrook, Connecticut 06475
| |
