MOTIONS
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, October 12, 2011 at 7:30 p.m. at the Town Hall, First Floor Conference Room, 302 Main Street, heard and decided the following appeals:
Seated for this evenings meeting and voting were the following members: Rexford McCall, Chairman, Dorothy Alexander, Vice Chairman, Chris Gosselin, Secretary, Joan Strickland and Brian Dooley
Present: Kim Barrows, Clerk
Absent: Mary Kennedy, (alternate), Allan Fogg (alternate) and Kent (Skip) Johnson (alternate)
The meeting was then called to order at 7:30 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.
A Motion was made by R. McCall to amend the agenda to move Appeal No. 11/12-11 McCormick to the first item heard this evening. It was seconded by C. Gosselin. No discussion and a vote was taken. In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, C. Gosselin, J. Strickland, B. Dooley Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
11/12-11 B Brendan McCormick and Rosemary McDermott seeks a variance of Par. 10.7.1 and 10.7.2 (nonconformity enlargement/change) and Par. 24.5.1 as amended by 68.1.2B4 (narrow street setback/33.5' required/18' proposed) of the Zoning Regulations to permit stoop extending 6' from existing house on property located at 5 Sea Lane ((Indian Town), Map No. 19, Lot No. 263.
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. The granting of the variance will not harm the intent of zoning. The proposal is in harmony with the neighborhood. The roof will not extend any further than the existing steps. This is also a safety issue for the occupants.
A Motion was made by C. Gosselin, seconded by R. McCall to GRANT Application 11/12-11 B Brendan McCormick and Rosemary McDermott. The proposed 6' roof covering the stoop is in harmony with the neighborhood. The safety factor for the occupants would be greatly enhanced in the winter with ice and snow. This is not in conflict with the Zoning Regulations. No discussion. A vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, J. Strickland, C. Gosselin, B. Dooley In Opposition: None Abstaining:
None The motion unanimously passed. 5-0-0
11/12-07 B Kevin and Brian P. Hickey seek a variance of Par. 10.8.2 and 10.8.4 (nonconformity/lots), Par. 24.3.1 (lot area/20,000 s.f. required/8,027 existing), Par. 24.3.2 (minimum dimension of a square 100' required/80' existing) and Par. 24.3.4 (minimum width along building line/100' required/80' existing) of the Zoning Regulations to permit demolition of existing year-round single family dwelling and construction of new, more conforming year-round single family dwelling on property located at 37 Saltaire Drive, Map No. 003, Lot No. 037.
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. The existing house is being demolished and rebuilt eliminating several existing nonconformities. The only variances requested are to re-qualify the lot. The adjacent neighbor has requested that the contractor protect the neighboring houses during construction, there will be no generators used during construction of the new house.
A Motion was made by B. Dooley, seconded by C. Gosselin to GRANT Application 11/12-07 B Kevin and Brian P. Hickey. The design improves the nonconformities and the architecture is in harmony with the neighborhood. The adjacent neighbors, who have been contacted, are aware of the project and have no major issues with the exception of safety by the contractor to have good management of construction practices (i.e. mitigation of dust, noise and property damage). There will be an additional bedroom (4), but there will be
an upgraded septic on the property, which has been approved by the Health District. No discussion. A vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, J. Strickland, C. Gosselin, B. Dooley In Opposition: None Abstaining: None The motion unanimously passed. 5-0-0
11/12-08 B 255 Middlesex Turnpike, LLC seeks a variance of Par. 64.5.3 (signage/one sign on principal wall/propose 4 signs on wall) and Par. 11.1 (see also Sec. 9) (signage/no billboards-single sign in excess of 100 s.f./4 signs total 105 s.f.) of the Zoning Regulations to permit signage, four signs, one for each of the four makes of automobiles sold on the premises on property located at 255 Middlesex Turnpike, Map No. 52, Lot No. 63-3.
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. The Board discussed the number of signs on the facade of the building. The Zoning Regulations are creating a hardship with the definition of “billboard” and the calculation of sign size and building size. Signage is supposed to “accommodate reasonable commercial promotion”. B. Dooley felt that a variance had been once granted for two signs on another building in the auto mall, this application requests four signs, the next tenant or building owner could request several more signs.
A Motion was made by C. Gosselin, seconded by R. McCall to GRANT Application 11/12-08 B 255 Middlesex Turnpike, LLC. The granting of the variance is based on the following facts: that the applicant is requesting, according to their numbers, 105 total square feet of signage on the front of the building as pictured in the application. According to the applicant, a maximum of 190 square feet would be permitted based on that same calculation. This is not the maximum that the applicant can have, it is less than that, which is
reasonable. The argument of the front of the building being a continuous plain and the desire of the applicant to have a portico to break up the facade, which is more architecturally appealing and that the Architectural Review Board has, in the past, found appealing. It is also more visually appealing as well. To apply the one wall definition as listed in Section 64.5.3 (d) of the Zoning Regulations creates an unusual hardship for this particular applicant and this property seeing as they are using the more reasonable square footage total than the maximum of 190 square feet. Relief from Section 11.1 of the Zoning Regulations is needed since this is clearly not a billboard. This proposal is in harmony with the other buildings and in this particular development. There is definitely an unusual hardship in this appeal. Discussion: The total amount of signage shall not exceed 105 square feet. No further discussion. A vote was taken: In favor: R.
McCall, D. Alexander, J. Strickland, C. Gosselin In Opposition: B. Dooley Abstaining: None The motion passed. 4-1-0
11/12-09 B Laurene J. Powers seeks a variance of Par. 10.7.1 and 10.7.2 (nonconformity enlargement/change), Par. 10.8.3 (lot size/12,500 s.f. required/8,400 s.f. existing), Par. 24.5.3 (sideline setback/15' required/8.91' proposed on south boundary) and Par. 24.5.3 (sideline setback/15' required/9.54' proposed on north boundary) of the Zoning Regulations to permit demolition of existing dwelling, construction of new dwelling on existing footprint with expansion for sunroom (8'x 10'), front porch (135 s.f.), addition of second floor and
unfinished storage space over garage on property located at 19 Park Avenue, Map No. 005, Lot No. 098.
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. The neighbors were supportive of the proposed plans. The Board felt that the applicant should eliminate nonconformities, not create them. There was discussion of the sun porch and its encroachment into the setback. The applicants stated that they would give up the sun porch in order to keep the garage with storage space.
A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by D. Alexander to GRANT w/conditions Application 11/12-09 B Laurene J. Powers. This application is granated with the condition that the proposed addition of 80 square feet on the porch is not part of the approval. The footprint will not allowed to be changed or added on to, but the proposed area over the entry to the rear of the garage, the roof area, is approved. Discussion of habitable or storage space in the attic above the second floor. That has been taken off the table. It is permitted. The Board does not have a problem of allowing that in the future. No further discussion. A vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, J. Strickland, C. Gosselin, B. Dooley In Opposition: None Abstaining: None The motion unanimously passed. 5-0-0
11/12-10 B Between-The-Bridges, LLC seeks a variance of Par. 10.5 casualty (non-conforming structure/compliance with Flood Plain Ordinance/first floor elevation proposed 5.3 feet) and Par. 35.5.1 (streetline setback/40' required/23.5' proposed for new building) of the Zoning Regulations to permit demolition of existing building and reconstruct a 59.3' x 60.1' boat storage building, remaining area occupied by building to be removed and replaced with concrete pad on property located at 2 Clark Street a/k/a 20-24 Ferry Place, Map No. 43, Lot
Nos.2 and 3.
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. The building project is due to February, 2011 storm damage to the South Yard on the bend at Ferry Road. The proposal is to demolish a portion of the building which is shown on the plans in the cross hatched area and reconstruct in a smaller area. The reconstruction is in accordance with the “Casualty” clause in the regulations, but since it is close to the water it needs to meet the Flood Hazard Regulations. A letter dated October 10, 2011 from Geoff Jacobson of Nathan Jacobson & Associates outlines several conditions that need to be met. After discussion, the Board made the following motion to approve.
A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by B. Dooley to GRANT Application 11/12-10 B Between-The-Bridges, LLC. To allow the reconstruction as proposed on the submitted plan as long as the conditions suggested in accordance with the Flood Plain Ordinance and Nathan Jacobson & Associates are adhered to both on the new proposed building and the existing attached building. (Copy of said letter is attached). No discussion. A vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, J. Strickland, C. Gosselin, B. Dooley
In Opposition: None Abstaining: None The motion unanimously passed. 5-0-0
Minutes: A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by B. Dooley to approve the Minutes of the September 14, 2011 Regular Meeting as submitted. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, C. Gosselin, J. Strickland, B. Dooley Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
Adjournment: A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by J. Strickland to adjourn the October 12, 2011 Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, C. Gosselin, J. Strickland, B. Dooley Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0 The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Rexford McCall, Chairman
Old Saybrook Zoning Board of Appeals
Old Saybrook, Connecticut 06475
The next Regular Meeting of the ZBA will be on Wednesday, November 9, 2011 at 7:30 p.m. at the TOWN HALL, First Floor Conference Room, 302 Main Street.
| 
