OLD LYME PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 11, 2007
PRESENT WERE: Chairman Harold Thompson, Vice Chair Robert McCarthy, Connie Kastelowitz, Chris Kerr, Steve Ross, and Alternates Robert Pierson and Nancy Strohla. Also present were: Angus McDonald, Tony Hendriks and Kim Groves
Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m.
SUBDIVISION – CLARKE PAYNE (BUSHY RUFF) – 228-1 MILE CREEK ROAD
Thompson reported the commission had received several items of correspondence on this subject. Thompson stated one of the items that were discussed at the public hearing was the orientation of a boundary line between the two parcels. He stated there was a curvature in the line that was questioned because it put a deck into the setback area. He stated as a result of this there were discussions between attorneys, Zoning Enforcement Officer and the applicant’s representative. He reported that the conclusions of these discussions are that this issue has been resolved.
Angus McDonald, representing the Payne’s, stated it was determined that this was a pre-existing non-conformity as a result of the free split when this lot was created in 1983. McDonald stated the line was never changed and has not been changed as part of this subdivision. McDonald reviewed Sheet 2 of the drawings with the commission, which shows the encroachment of 2+ feet. He also stated that a note has been placed on the plan indicating this was a pre-existing non-conformity.
Thompson stated another item that was brought up during the public hearing was the fee in lieu of open space. Thompson stated that there was discussion amongst the commission members but no motion was ever made. McDonald stated it was his understanding that since this division included two existing lots then the fee should be based only on the acreage of the two new lots. He stated the number he was provided by Angus McDonald, Sr. from the last meeting was $18,000.00. Ross reviewed with the commission the minutes from the September meeting.
Chris Kerr made a motion that the fee in lieu of open space is set at $19,000.00. Robert McCarthy seconded the motion. Steve Ross abstained. The motion passed.
Thompson noted that Ann Brown has approved the plan for zoning compliance and Ron Rose has granted health approval.
Harold Thompson made a motion to approve the Subdivision Application of Clarke Payne at 228-1 Mile Creek Road (Plans Revised thru October 5, 2007). Steve Ross seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Page 2 – Minutes
October 11, 2007
LOT LINE MODIFICATION – JOHN VIECELE & ROBERT ASSELIN – 2 & 4 BANK ROAD
Tony Hendriks presented on behalf of the applicant. He stated the proposal is to change the common boundary line between two parcels of property they own. He stated these lots were not ever part of any prior subdivisions or modifications. He stated in September 2007 the Old Lyme Zoning Board of Appeals voted to grant a variance at 2 Bank Road to enlarge a building devoted to a non-conforming use. He stated one of the conditions of the approval was the applicant must receive approval from the Planning Commission for a lot line reconfiguration.
Hendriks indicated that Mr. Metcalf requested in his letter to the commission that the map identify/depict septic system locations for each dwelling to assure the revised property line does not create a non-conforming situation as it relates to the Public Health Code. Hendriks stated from what he has been told from the client, the leaching system is in front of the house off to the left side, which is in conformance with the Public Health Code requirements. He further stated he did not know exactly where it was located but they do own both parcels. Hendriks also noted that Mr. Rose has written a letter to the commission granting approval of the modification.
Thompson asked why the modification was proposed. Hendriks stated this is an existing residential home in a waterfront district. Therefore, when the Zoning Commission enacted regulations for the WF zone they took away the right to have a residential use in a waterfront district. Hendriks stated the applicant wants to make an improvement to this residential property and they could not do it without a variance. Hendriks reported that the variance was granted under the condition the lot line is modified.
Harold Thompson made a motion to approve the lot line modification as presented. Steve Ross seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
DRAFT ADDENDUM TO THE 1999 OLD LYME HARBOR MANAGEMENT PLAN
Steve Ross stated he was member of the Harbor Management Commission and Chairman of the sub-committee who has developed this proposal. He further stated he would be happy to answer questions or make a presentation on this matter.
Thompson asked why this proposal was created. Ross stated it was written in order to establish better standards in order to better manage docks and other structures water ward of the high tide line in order to continue to have structures that do not deviate from the way things currently look. He stated it would prevent the building of structures that would be vastly different in size and appearance from what we currently have in these areas. He stated most of these areas are environmentally sensitive and aesthetically desirable for the character of Old Lyme and need to be preserved as well as conform to the Town Plan of Conservation and Development.
Thompson stated there are already DEP and Army Corp regulations, therefore what is being added that is not already existing. Ross stated that DEP regulations address some of this, however DEP does not have a standards for docks. Pierson stated the Army Corp has standards. Ross stated he was not familiar with their standards. Pierson stated that the dock constructed on Mile Creek Road had some very strict standards to
Page 3 – Minutes
October 11, 2007
meet compliance. Ross stated the problem is that you can get a dock approved without going to any local boards. Kim Groves stated that was incorrect because every dock needs Special Exception Site Plan approval from the Zoning Commission under Section 7.4.7 of the Zoning Regulations.
Chris Kerr stated he felt the plan was over regulating. Chris Kerr also asked if all waterfront property owners were informed of this proposal. Ross stated they have not gone to the public yet, because they first wanted to receive comments from other land use boards and agencies. He also noted they wanted the document reviewed by the DEP and in that process the document could change significantly. Thompson asked if the document would be referred to counsel for review. Ross stated the document was discussed with Attorney Marilyn Clarke, but unfortunately her expertise in this area was limited. Thompson stated one of the commission members brought up something about “reasonable riparian access to navigational waters” and he felt that some of this goes back to colonial days. Therefore he asked if any changes were proposed that would change what history established.
Kim Groves asked if the Zoning Commission would use this document as part of their review process. Ross indicated that Harbor Management’s jurisdiction is waterward of high tide. He stated they do not have any jurisdiction of what is landward of high tide.
Chris Kerr questioned that Page 8 states “to eliminate new riparian/littoral rights-of-way for non-riparian/littoral landowners prohibiting structures on easements granted to properties other than those immediately adjacent to the waterfront.” Kerr asked what happens if someone has a deed that lives across the street that grants them right to use this waterfront property. Kerr stated for example, if he lives on the Lieutenant River and his sister lived across the street, he could not give her rights in his deed that states she could build a dock on his property. Ross stated he would have to apply for the dock because it is his property. Kerr stated access to anything could be granted in a deed. Ross stated the docks still runs with the property.
Kerr stated it is similar to Binney Road, which has deeded mooring rights. Ross stated he did not see a problem if (the person across the street) has deeded rights on waterfront property then those rights are not changed. Kerr stated that is existing but what happens to the ones that are created. Ross stated if you are creating waterfront property you are basically changing the ownership of it, Kerr stated not the ownership just the use. Pierson stated you could deed a right to build a dock on someone else’s property. Ross stated the property owner would still have to apply. Pierson stated he felt the person who has the deeded right to build that dock can apply. Ross stated he was unclear of the problem.
Pierson questioned on Page 6 “in defined sensitive resource areas”, if the Old Lyme Harbor Management Commission considers “reasonable riparian access to navigational waters” as that gained through non-structurual methods” was a legal decision. Pierson expressed concern that this was a law that goes back to colonial days. Ross stated you do not have to build something to have access. Ross stated they have not received legal counsel, but this will be part of the DEP review. Pierson recommended the document be reviewed prior to being submitted to the DEP. Pierson stated studies were done over a thirteen year period on non-structural methods (1990-2003). He stated he was brought up on the Black Hall River in the 1950’s and almost every
lot that reached out had a dock on it and probably half of them are gone now. He stated when there were docks out there we frowned on people who used non-structural methods because it eventually kills the grasses and roots and the bank could cave in and depending on the location it may wash into the channel. Therefore, he would rather see a dock that does a minimum amount of damage at installation and the meadows remain to continue to grow.
Page 4 – Minutes
October 11, 2007
Chris Kerr stated he personally feels that the Army Corp, DEP and Zoning are enough regulations. Kerr stated the document states that Old Lyme is one of the first towns to start this process. He stated he felt other towns have not done this because there are enough regulations already. Ross stated this is not the reason. He stated when the former Harbor Master and the Harbor Management Commission outlined standards for docks, the commission then met with DEP and they said in order adopt standards the commission must provide the rationale for the standards. He stated the commission then used the guidance of Torrence Downes, CRERPA for his assistance in the development of this document.
Pierson questionned Item 2 on Page 16 which states “no private residential dock should be located over any submerged aquatic vegetation”. He stated if you look at any area below the water there is some type of vegetation. Ross stated he agreed with that.
Kastelowitz stated she agreed with the consensus of the commission that there seems to be enough regulations in existence and historically all of the years that waterfront has been sitting there it has not been necessary.
Ross gave an example to the commission. He asked how they would like to see a 150” pier in front of the Pavillion to allow them to park boats while they are at the bar. He further stated the Town of Old Lyme does not have any regulations that would prohibit this action. Kerr stated he felt it was unreasonable to implement regulations for an entire town because of one person. Pierson stated if this was feasible it would of happened years ago. Ross stated this person found it easier to circumvent the system by installing illegal moorings and running boats back and forth to shore. Pierson asked if the moorings were under the jurisdiction of the Harbor Management Commission. Ross stated was supposed to be working on that this summer but because of unrelated problems he was not able to do it.
Ross suggested the Planning Commission respond to the Harbor Management Commission. He suggested the response include some of the specifics. Groves asked if the minutes would be adequate. Ross indicated that would be fine.
Ross stated that every dock under the current regulations could have a lift. Kerr and Pierson stated they felt that would be the right of the property owner, however cost would keep this type of action to a minimum. Kastelowitz stated once again this has never been a problem historically, therefore why is it becoming one.
Thompson noted that there was a lot of work put into the creation of this document. Thompson further stated the commission has raised a lot of questions as to how much regulation is being proposed by Harbor Management that is not already being regulated by DEP, Army Corp and Zoning. Thompson also asked how docks were being installed without permits. Ross stated that many of them go back more than fifteen to twenty years.
Ross stated it was important that the minutes reflect the concerns of the commission. He stated the primary concern he understood from the commission is that the proposal is excessive regulations and the regulations currently provided by the various agencies are sufficient.
Page 5 – Minutes
October 11, 2007
LORDS WOODS SUBDIVISON – PARTIAL BOND RELEASE
Thompson stated the commission received a letter from Tom Metcalf with regard to the request. He stated Mr. Metcalf has suggested that the commission’s attorney for any legal aspects review the bond reduction request. Thompson noted that this request has been forwarded to counsel for his review.
Ross stated that the Open Space is in the process of meeting with the owners of the Awwa Subdivision to reach an agreement with regard to the restoration of the area that was cut due to a marking error in the field. Therefore, he felt it was important that the Planning Commission not take any action until this issue has been resolved.
Pierson stated that Attorney Block indicates in his letter to the commission that the applicant would be willing to pay the outstanding legal and engineering fees from the bond proceeds. Pierson recommends that the commission exercise this option when it does take action on this matter.
Thompson made a motion to table the Lords Woods Subdivision partial bond release until the next meeting.
Robert McCarthy seconded the motion.
Kerr questioned the amount of money being imposed on the applicant by the Open Space Commission for the restoration of the site for the cutting that was done in the wrong location on the site. Kerr asked how much land was actually damaged. The commission was not clear on the actual acreage involved. Kerr stated he hoped the fee was not to excessive because if the fee is more than the fee in lieu of open space there is the concern that the applicant could just pay their ten percent which would be substantially less than the fine. Kerr further stated the subdivision was purchased for $600,000 and therefore, the fee in lieu of would be $60,000.00 which is ten percent of the appraised value. Kerr further stated it is not like the land is totally condemned and there is no toxic waste
on the site. He stated trees would grow back. Kerr also noted that the last purchase the Open Space Committee made was based on $10,000.00 per acre.
Ross noted that Kerr raised a very good argument. Ross stated if raw land is purchased there is nothing that prohibits the property owner from clear cutting if he is not building anything.
Kerr stated when he heard the figure of $150,000.00 he felt that was excessive because it is not like the land is not usable.
The motion passed unanimously.
READING AND APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 AND OCTOBER 3, 2007 MINUTES
Steve Ross made a motion to waive the reading and approve the minutes as submitted. Connie Kastelowitz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Kim Groves
Land Use Administrator
| 
