MINUTES
Zoning Board of Appeals
Town of Old Saybrook
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Old Saybrook at its Meeting that was held on Wednesday, April 8, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. in the first floor Conference Room, Town Hall, 302 Main Street, 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, Joan Strickland, Brian Dooley, alternate
Present: Wendy Farah, alternate, Kim Barrows, Clerk
Absent: Chris Gosselin, Allan Fogg, alternate
The meeting was then called to order at 7:33 p.m.
The following public hearings were conducted, as well as the decision making sessions. 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.
PUBLIC HEARING
08/09-28C – Karen Butler seeks a variance of Par. 10.7.1 (nonconformity), Par. 24.5.1 as modified by Par. 7.4.4 (narrow street) (streetline setback/30' required/proposed 27.81' existing), Par. 24.5.3 (setback/other - 15' required/14.20' existing), Par. 7.4.10 (tidal wetlands setback/50' required/39.49' existing) and Par. 24.5.5 (sideyard setback/minor accessory bldg/ 10' required /5' from property line) of the Zoning Regulations to permit demolition of existing dwelling and construct new two-story dwelling on existing foundation, move existing detached garage in five feet from sideline utilizing existing slab on property located at 68 Neptune Drive, Map No. 4, Lot No. 272.
Present: Attorney Christina P. Burnham, agent for the applicant; Karen Butler, applicant
Attorney Burnham gave a brief presentation. The proposal is to demolish the existing dwelling and construct a new dwelling that conforms with the FEMA regulations. A similar application was before the Board previously and after the concerns made by the Board at the time of denial, the applicant proposes to move the existing garage an additional five feet from the tidal wetlands setback. The garage will utilize the existing concrete slab and there will be no disturbance of the wetlands in that area. There was discussion as to why the applicant needs to keep the garage and due to meeting the FEMA requirements, the basement of the dwelling will be filled with sand. There will be no other storage space on the property for lawn mower, grill, gas can or propane tank, which should not be stored in
the dwelling. The existing foundation for the house will be used and will not violate the setbacks any further. The dwelling will be in line with the rest of the houses on the street.
It becomes a hardship to move the existing foundation back, if it is moved back it will impact the wetlands. Only one portion of the existing foundation encroaches into the setback. The Board discussed putting in a new foundation and moving it back and also discussed the need for the garage. B. Dooley stated that given the fact that the applicant has to give up the basement for storage, the garage is a compromise. J. Strickland stated that the applicant has made an effort. 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 was closed at 7:53 p.m.
Voting Session
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. D. Alexander did not feel that there was a hardship. The moving of the foundation is a “financial” hardship to the applicant, which does not constitute a valid hardship for granting the variances. D. Alexander feels that there are other alternatives the applicant can explore and she can’t support granting the variances. J. Castagno stated that when the applicant was before the Board a couple of months ago, the Board expressed concern about the location of the garage and denied the application. This proposal moves the garage approximately 5 feet further away from the wetlands. J. Strickland stated that since the basement has to be filled in due to the flood plain requirements, the applicant will not
have storage area for lawnmower and gasoline. B. Dooley agreed that the issue was the location of the garage and that issue has been addressed. R. McCall stated that he did support the previous application and since an effort was made to move the garage, he will support this proposal.
A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by J. Strickland to GRANT Application No. 08/09-28C - Butler. The existing foundation to be maintained with only a very slight encroachment on the setback requirements and an effort by the applicant to further conform to the setback from the wetlands is appreciated and justifies granting the variances. The CAM application is also approved since there is no adverse impact on the wetlands. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, J. Castagno, J. Strickland, B. Dooley Opposed: D. Alexander Abstaining: None The motion passed. 4-1-0
08/09-29 – Brian and Joan Lewis seek a variance of Par. 10.7.1 (nonconformity), 10.7.2 (nonconformity/change), Par. 24.5.1 as modified by Par. 7.4.4 (narrow street) (streetline setback/35' required/proposed 24.1') and Par. 24.5.3 (setback/other - 15' required/14' and 12.5' existing) of the Zoning Regulations to permit removal of existing 20' x 6' porch and replace with a new 20' x 6' addition, 5' x 8' mudroom and rear dormer on property located at 46 Chalker Beach Road, Map No. 18, Lot No. 40.
Present: Mr. & Mrs. Lewis, applicants; Jeffrey Klaussen, builder
Mr. Lewis gave a brief presentation. They would like to replace the existing 20' x 6' porch with an addition and align the front entrance a little further back from the road. The doorway is to be removed and reconfigured with a mudroom addition. The house is bordered by three streets and the front steps are close to the road. Applicants would like to make the changes for safety reasons. The hardship is the narrow nonconforming lot that is bounded by three streets. A letter dated April 3, 2009 from J. Kevin Kinsella of 3 DeRenne Road was in favor of the project. 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 was closed at 8:13 p.m.
Voting Session
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. The hardship is the narrow nonconforming lot, that is bounded by three streets. The applicants are trying to reduce the nonconformities and there is no additional land available to make the lot larger. The Board felt the applicants made an effort to reduce the existing nonconformities.
A Motion was made by D. Alexander, seconded by R. McCall to GRANT Application No. 08/09-29 - Lewis. The improvements that are requested are going to result in a net gain in conformity and the house will be more attractive. The hardship expressed about the unique location of the lot with roads on three sides makes it very difficult to do anything to the house except what the applicants have suggested. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: D. Alexander, R. McCall, J. Castagno, J. Strickland, B. Dooley Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
08/09-30C – James Allen and Kathy Beta Price seek a variance of Par. 10.7.1 (nonconformity/ improvements) and Par. 7.4.10 (tidal wetlands setback/50' required/20.3' proposed) of the Zoning Regulations to permit demolition of existing building and construct new year-round dwelling with attached garage on property located at 49 Woodland Drive, Map No. 4, Lot No. 67.
Present: William A. Childress, Esquire, agent for the applicants; Ms. Price, applicant
Attorney Childress gave a brief presentation and he also submitted a new site plan with two minor changes. The lot is a double lot in Knollwood with 25,508 s.f., but only 9,800 +/- s.f. of upland area to build on. The new dwelling will be FEMA compliant, there will be a reduction in the number of bedrooms from 4 to 3 and a new septic system is proposed. The project complies with ground coverage and floor area and several existing nonconformities will be taken care of. The existing side and front deck will be removed. The hardship is that the wetlands setback and the streetline setback overlap. The existing dwelling has been used as a legal residence for many years. Discussion as to the amount of fill to be placed on the property. Attorney Childress stated that no fill is
proposed. There will be some grading of the driveway. The Chairman then opened the floor for comments from the audience either in favor or in opposition. Shirley Dalhstrom of 53 Wooldand Drive asked about drainage. She is concerned about water runoff from the property. Ms. Vicky Dahlstrom also talked about the drainage and the catch basins in the area and how they overflow when the tide comes in or there is a substantial rainfall. There was no audience participation and no Board comments. The public hearing was closed at 8:54 p.m.
Voting Session
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. The consensus of the Board was that there is not a hardship shown in moving the house even closer to the wetlands than it is. The Zoning Board of Appeals back in April of 1983 granted variances to allow the construction of a single family residence and garage. The tidal wetlands setback line and the street setback line overlapped. The argument then was that if the variances were not granted, it would be confiscatory. As stated by the Board members this evening, there is already a house on the property, it can be renovated and still be habitable. J. Castagno asked if it would be less of a problem if the encroachment was in the front and not further into the wetlands setback. R. McCall stated that he would
prefer that, since he is very concerned that the foundation as presented is so close. If applicant wants to move the foundation closer to the road they would have to re-apply.
A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by J. Strickland to DENY Application No. 08/09-30C - Price. The reason for denial is that there is a greater encroachment with the foundation to the wetlands, and clear hardship has not been shown. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, J. Castagno, J. Strickland, B. Dooley Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
REGULAR MEETING
New Business: None
Old Business: None
Minutes: A Motion was made by D. Alexander, seconded by J. Castagno to approve the Minutes of the March 11, 2009 Regular Meeting. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, J. Strickland, J. Castagno, B. Dooley 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 April 8, 2009 Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, J. Strickland, J. Castagno, B. Dooley Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0 The meeting was adjourned at 9:06 p.m.
The next Regular Meeting of the ZBA will be on Wednesday, May 13, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. at the TOWN HALL, First Floor Conference Room, 302 Main Street.
Respectfully submitted,
Kim N. Barrows, Recording Clerk
Old Saybrook Zoning Board of Appeals
Old Saybrook, Connecticut 06475
| 
