 |
MOTIONS
Town of Old Saybrook
Zoning Board of Appeals
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 9, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. which will be continued to Wednesday, September 16, 2015 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, Robert McIntyre, Philip Broadhurst,
Alan Spargo and Carl VonDassel, Jr., alternate
Present: Michael E. Cronin, Jr., Esquire, counsel for the ZBA, Kim Barrows, Clerk
The meeting was then called to order at 7:00 p.m. The following public hearings were conducted, as well as the decision making sessions. The meeting has been recorded 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.
14/15-35 – Kevin & Colleen Shay seek a variance of Par. 26.3.1(minimum lot area/87,120 s.f. required/86,275.11 s.f. proposed) of the Zoning Regulations to permit subdivision of 173,401.22 s.f. (3.98 acres) to two building lots of 87,126.11 s.f. (2 acres) and 86,275.11 s.f. (1.98 acres) on property located at 23 Otter Cove Drive (aka 11 Azaela Way) , Map No. 64, Lot No. 14, Residence AA-3 District, Coastal Area Management Zone, CT River Gateway Conservation Zone.
The public hearing closed on August 19, 2015 and the deliberation was continued to September 9, 2015 to digest the information presented. The lot owned by the applicants, being Lot #30, and being 3.98 acres in area, is shown on a subdivision map approved as a subdivision by the Old Saybrook Planning Commission on October 16, 1962. The applicants have recently constructed a single-family dwelling house on the lot and have occupied it as a personal residence by them from 2013 to the present time. This application is for a variance in the provisions of Section 26.3.1 of the zoning regulations regarding the minimum lot area for a lot. The applicants seek to create a second building lot on Lot #30 to allow the construction of a second single-family dwelling. The Board asked its attorney, Mike
Cronin for an opinion. Attorney Cronin crafted two motions, one in favor of granting the variances and one for denial. He stated that the Board needed to make a decision. Attorney Cronin could uphold either motion if the matter went to court.
Chairman McCall polled the Board on how they felt as to whether or not this was a self-created hardship or not. R. McCall and D. Alexander felt it was self-created, A. Spargo said that Attorney Reardon [part of Lex Limited who purchased the property] owns at least 17 properties. A. Spargo felt that Attorney Reardon, not being a novice in purchasing real estate, should have had an A-2 survey done prior to purchase if there were discrepancies in the deed and the lot size was 3.98 +/-. P. Broadhurst stated that the survey was done two weeks after the purchase of the property. It is noted on the survey Mr. Pfanner prepared for Attorney Reardon that a “variance” would be needed. The property was bought on speculation. Therefore P. Broadhurst feels this is a self-created hardship.
R. McIntyre concurs.
A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by A. Spargo to DENY Application 14/15-35 – Kevin & Colleen Shay, 23 Otter Cove Drive (aka 11 Azaela Way) as follows:
1. That the hardship claimed by the applicants to justify the granting of the variance request was self-created because they knew, or should have known, that the total lot area, being 3.98 acres, was insufficient to allow two building lots to be created from the single parcel of land, and notwithstanding this, they proceeded with the purchase of said property.
2. That having acquired the subject parcel, and thereafter constructing a single-family dwelling house on it, in conformity with all zoning regulations (which included both current regulations and regulations in effect at the time of the original approval of the subdivision in 1962) said regulations were and are not confiscatory in any material way, and have allowed them a reasonable use of their property.
3. Any misconception the applicants may have had with respect to the lot area at the time they purchased said property, which evidence in the case showed was based upon their assumption that there was an error in the legal description of the property, although unfortunate, did not form a basis to establish a legal hardship regarding the purchase of said property which would justify the granting of a variance in lot area as requested. Knowing that there was an error in the description of the property, they chose not to specifically identify the cause of that error by having an A-2 survey of the property prior to its purchase.
4. Although the new proposed building lot is only 839 square feet short of the 87,120 square feet minimum lot area requirement, based upon court decisions in Connecticut, this in and of itself does not allow for granting of a variance by this Board for that reason.
No further discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, P. Broadhurst, R. McIntyre, A. Spargo Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
15/16-08 - Peter & Debra Palmieri, seek a modification of appeal 94/95-8 to remove condition of approval that the porch must remain screened at 18 Baum Avenue, Map 26/Lot 20, Residence A District.
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. Back in 1994 a variance was granted for the construction of porch but there was a condition put on the variance that the porch only have screens, this was a condition due to the septic system guidelines at the time. The Palmieri’s 12 years ago replaced the screens with glassed windows. The Palmieri’s now live in Florida and are selling the Old Saybrook property but need the variance modified so that windows are allowed. The Health District approved the proposal since the septic has been replaced and the guidelines have changed since the original variance was granted. The Chairman spoke with Mr. Martinson, the Sanitarian and confirmed this.
A Motion was made by A. Spargo, seconded by R. McCall to modify the original variance granted in 1994 to now allow the screens to become “glassed” windows based on the approval from the Connecticut River Area Health District. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, P. Broadhurst, R. McIntyre, A. Spargo Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0
15/16-11C - Robert Daniels & Maria Rose-Daniels, Trustees, seek a variance of Par 10.8.2 & 10.8.3 (non-conforming lot size/20,000 s.f. required/14,464 s.f. proposed); Par 24.5.1 as modified by 68.1.2B(4) (narrow street setback/30’ required to Indianola Drive/1.5’ proposed and 37.5’ required to Town Beach Road/22’ proposed); Par 24.5.2 (side yard setback/15’ required/7.44’ to house, 7.6’ to garage and 3.3’ to condenser proposed) of the Zoning Regulations to permit demolition of existing structure and construction of 3644 s.f. house at 85 Town Beach Road, Map No. 2/Lot 013, Residence A District, Coastal Area Management Zone.
Discussion with respect to the public hearing that closed this evening. It was noted for the record that Alan Spargo abstained on the vote from the variance request heard on July 8, 2015. The new proposal is to teardown and rebuild the existing nonconforming structure. The new structure will be FEMA complaint and the main structure will be moved further from the property lines than currently exists. The proposal also includes a new code compliant septic system and a subsurface stormwater infiltration system. The drainage structures have been reviewed by Town Engineer, Geoff Jacobson. The lot is “L” shaped and the implementation of the Residence A District standards on a legal non-conforming lot create a hardship, particularly due to the fact that the upper area of the lot is very
narrow and is a corner lot with two front yard setbacks. Also the lot slopes from west to east going from elevation 12’ to 6’. There will be a number of reduced non-conformities with respect to the proposed house. There were concerns from several neighbors regarding drainage. The applicants are doing everything they can on their property to alleviate drainage issues. They are not responsible for the draining issues on Sea Breeze Road and the other Town roads as stated by D. Alexander. P. Broadhurst has the same concerns from the last application wherein the proposed structure is too large for the lot. It increases bulk, quantity and dimension to the neighborhood, not to mention increasing a non-conformity by increasing the size of the house. No one is being denied the use of the property for a single family residence but it should be scaled down to be in keeping with the neighborhood and the size of the lot. Just
because the applicants are disappointed in the house, that doesn’t constitute a hardship. R. McCall voted for the previous application but had concerns about flooding. The size of the home fits with area homes. R. McIntyre agrees, he was in favor last time and agrees the Town should do more to alleviate flooding in the area. A. Spargo who abstained the last time, still has issues with the flooding in the area and how to alleviate it. R. McIntyre reiterated that the flooding is not all caused by the Daniel’s property and if the Town does its part it will get better.
A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by R. McIntyre to GRANT w/condition Application 15/16-11C - Robert Daniels & Maria Rose-Daniels, Trustees. The flooding problem has been addressed at length by two engineers. There are several nonconformities being reduced from the current building that exists today. The condition is that the drainage system be inspected by the Town’s engineer prior to being covered over to insure that all of the appropriate “muck” is removed and replaced with a better soil. Also the Coastal Site Plan Review
Application is approved as well because it is consistent with all applicable coastal policies and includes all reasonable measures to mitigate adverse impacts. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, R. McIntyre, A. Spargo Opposed: P. Broadhurst Abstaining: None The motion passed. 4-1-0
15/16-10C - Richard A. Long & Gloria E. Zailskas, seek a variance of Par. 10.7.1 & 10.7.2 (non-conformity enlargement/change); Par 24.5.2 (side yard setback/15’ required/9.16 proposed); Par. 68.1.2.B.9 (tidal wetlands setback/50’ required/22.42’ proposed) of the Zoning Regulations to permit an 85 s.f. deck expansion at 15 Buckingham Avenue, Map 14/Lot 116, Residence A District, Coastal Area Management Zone.
Per a letter dated September 9, 2015 from Edward Cassella, Esquire, attorney for the applicants requesting that the opening of the public hearing for Appeal No. 15/16-10C for Richard Long and Gloria Zailskas be scheduled for the October 14, 2015 Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the first floor conference room, Town Hall, 302 Main Street.
A Motion was made by R. McCall, seconded by R. McIntyre to CONTINUE the September 9, 2015 Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals to the Special Meeting on Wednesday, September 16, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. first floor conference room, Town Hall. No discussion and a vote was taken: In favor: R. McCall, D. Alexander, R. McIntyre, P. Broadhurst, A. Spargo Opposed: None Abstaining: None The motion passed unanimously. 5-0-0 The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m.
Old Saybrook Zoning Board of Appeals
Rexford H. McCall, Chairman
NEXT SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS IS WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2015, 7:00 p.m., FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM, 302 MAIN STREET, OLD SAYBROOK
NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS IS WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2015, 7:00 p.m., FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM, 302 MAIN STREET, OLD SAYBROOK
| |
