APPROVED
OLD LYME ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, June 12, 2007
The Old Lyme Zoning Board of Appeals met on Tuesday, June 12, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. at the Church of Christ the King Parish Center. Those present and voting were Susanne Stutts (Chairman), Richard Moll, Judy McQuade and Joseph St. Germain (Alternate – seated for Kip Kotzan).
Chairman Stutts called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. She explained to the applicants that because there are only four members present this evening all votes must be unanimous in order to pass. Chairman Stutts stated that each applicant can choose to have their hearing this evening or continue it to the July Regular Meeting.
ITEM 1: Public Hearing Case 07-18 Robert Asselin, 2 Bank Road, variance to construct a second floor addition thereby expanding a nonconforming use.
Chairman Stutts noted that the applicant is not present this evening. She also noted that the application has been on the agenda for both May and June and it is still incomplete. No one present spoke in favor or against the application. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Stutts closed the Public Hearing.
ITEM 2: Public Hearing Case 07-19 Sapia, 128 Boston Post Road, Conversion of garage to family room on a nonconforming lot.
Chairman Stutts stated that the existing nonconformities on the property are: 21.3.1, lot size, 20,000 square feet required, 15,000 existing; 21.3.2, minimum lot area per dwelling, 20,000 required, 15,000 existing and 7.6, minimum floor area, no building intended for dwelling shall be constructed less than 800 square feet, 748 square feet existing. She noted that the proposal does not comply with Section 8.9.3, no building on a nonconforming lot may be expanded.
Ms. Sapia explained that they have begun, and would like to finish, the conversion of their garage into a family room. She explained that the house is currently 748 square feet and converting the garage to living space will eliminate that nonconformity. Ms. Sapia stated that the room is not intended to be a bedroom; they currently have two bedrooms and will continue to have two bedrooms.
Chairman Stutts read the hardship as provided on the application which states that the house was constructed in the 1950’s and there is no land available to purchase. Ms. Sapia explained that the abutting lots are not large enough to sell her any property.
Mr. Moll asked that the applicant explain her photographs in relation to the floor plans provided. Ms. Sapia indicated that the only change she made other than the flooring and sheetrock was to add two windows where the garage door was. She showed these changes as depicted in the photographs.
Mr. St. Germain questioned the square footage of the garage. Ms. Sapia stated that it is 280 square feet or 14’ x 20’. Ms. Sapia noted that the footprint of the house did not change.
No one present spoke in favor of or against the application. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Stutts called the Public Hearing to a close.
ITEM 3: Public Hearing Case 07-20 David Kelsey, 12 Ferry Road, variance to construct third floor dormers.
Mr. Moll stated that this case was heard in April and he questioned whether it was substantially different. Attorney Cronin, present to represent the applicant, stated that the minutes of the April meeting were considered in redesigning the plan. He explained that the application has been substantially revised.
Attorney Cronin introduced David and Martha Kelsey, owners of 12 Ferry Road. He noted that Jim Plyler, contractor, was also present. Attorney Cronin stated that the lot is conforming at over 63,000 square feet which is unusual for the center of Town. He explained that there is currently an old Victorian that was constructed in 1884 and the Kelsey’s are gutting and reconstructing the home. Attorney Cronin stated that the renovations include a new septic system.
Attorney Cronin stated that the building was constructed 130 years ago before modern heating systems, plumbing systems and building codes. He explained that the plans that were before the Board in April were, what the Kelsey’s thought, to be a reasonable request for a slight expansion of the structure and the Board denied it. Attorney Cronin stated that he asked Ms. Bartlett to bring this application so that the Board could look at it if there were any questions this evening. Attorney Cronin reviewed the previous drawings with the Board. He stated that the area of new construction on the project which was proposed in the previous application is outlined in red on the plan. Attorney Cronin stated that on the left hand side is the proposed new roof and dormers for the third floor which
created a full third floor expansion. Attorney Cronin stated that on the right hand side of the drawing is the celestory, which opens up the third story to light and air. He noted that the celestory has been constructed by a valid Zoning and Building Permit and is considered to be a permissible expansion of the envelope of the structure. Attorney Cronin stated that the new stairway and celestory are existing conditions. He explained that the original staircase was small and narrow. Attorney Cronin stated that the Board denied this application.
Attorney Cronin reviewed the drawings for the current application. He noted that the only new construction that will be seen from the street is the celestory. Attorney Cronin pointed out that most of the work is on the rear of the structure and even the homes on either side have no clear view of the area being modified. He noted that they are leaving the present roof in tact and are proposing to add two small dormers to the exterior. Attorney Cronin stated that this is a substantial change from the previous application. He explained the new stairway and how it emerges into the middle of the celestory. Attorney Cronin stated that at the top of the stairs there is a door that leads to an 11’9” x 11’1” bedroom. He explained that the area to the right of the
stairwell is an open area that is part of the stairwell and may eventually be an area with exercise machines; the area is 9’9” x 11’11”. Attorney Cronin stated that there is a room that is accessed through the bathroom which is not a functional room. He noted that in order to relocate the bathroom they need an additional 3 feet of width which is the area of the first dormer. Attorney Cronin stated that this allows the original bathroom to become a hallway. He noted that the area cross-hatched on the plans is unused area that will be under the existing roof. Attorney Cronin stated that on the right hand side there is a utility room shown and this is where the heating system will be located. He noted that the dormer on the east side is for the bathroom and the dormer on the west side is for the heating system.
Mr. Plyler explained that there is no net gain in the livable area. He indicated that he calculates 20 less square feet of livable area then when the house was originally purchased by the Kelsey’s. Mr. Plyler stated that the gain in area is the 2’ x 9’ area along each side. He noted that they have lost living area due to the heating system being located on the third floor.
Attorney Cronin stated that the Zoning Regulations do not properly define ½ story. He displayed pictures of many newer homes in Old Lyme with dormers on the third floor. Attorney Cronin stated that the Zoning Regulations have not changed in this regard but Zoning Enforcement Officers have changed, with each having their own interpretation. He explained that Ms. Brown’s interpretation of the Regulations is the reason they are before the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Chairman Stutts questioned the hardship. Attorney Cronin stated that the hardship begins with the fact that they are starting with a structure built in 1884 and are trying to adopt it to current codes. He indicated that renovations to older structures have inherent problems. Attorney Cronin explained that one has to go through the existing bathroom to access the rear of the third floor, which is not practical. He indicated that for this reason they need the one dormer and the other dormer is needed to house the modern heating system. Attorney Cronin pointed out that they are not adding any living area to the third floor. He noted that the rear room will be used as a study as there are no closets. Attorney Cronin stated that the house is very narrow by today’s standards.
Mr. Plyler stated that the home was originally five bedrooms and they are reducing it to four bedrooms.
Mr. Moll stated that in April, there were still test holes needed at the site. He stated that one of the significant changes is that this application says there shall be a new septic system installed. Mr. Moll stated that he cannot understand why there is a five-bedroom septic proposed for a four-bedroom home. Mr. Plyler stated that he believes that the septic is larger because of the Jacuzzi in the bathroom. Mr. Kelsey replied that they also may have an outside Jacuzzi installed. He indicated that they are planning ahead so that they do not have to increase the size of their system at a later date. Mr. Kelsey reiterated that there would only be four-bedrooms. Mr. Moll stated that if approved, he would like a condition that the home be limited to four bedrooms.
Attorney Cronin stated that the building height, under 7.3.1, states that no building or other structure shall be constructed, reconstructed, enlarged, etc., in such a manner as to exceed the maximum height specified in the district or contain more than two stories and an attic above grade. He noted that under the building height restriction, there cannot be a third story, only an attic. Attorney Cronin stated that attic is defined in the Regulations as the space between the ceiling beams of the top story and the wood floor. He indicated that the standards in the district does not discuss attic, it refers to 2 and ½ stories. Attorney Cronin stated that ½ story is not defined and the interpretation of ½ story has changed with each Zoning Official. Attorney Cronin stated that
this is part of their hardship.
Attorney Cronin stated that the Kelsey’s are assessed for a finished attic of 462 square feet. He noted the finished area as proposed is 460 square feet. He indicated that they will not have any more area than they are currently taxed on. Attorney Cronin stated that there is no over-intensification on this lot, pointing out that the home meets all bulk requirements of the Zoning Regulations and is on a conforming lot. He pointed out that if this structure were simply removed, one could construct a much larger structure.
Ms. McQuade questioned the height of the celestory. Mr. Plyler replied that it is 33’6” high.
Mr. Moll questioned whether there is a rear elevation drawing showing the new dormers. Mr. Plyler replied that he does not. Mr. Moll noted that he would like a full set of drawings as a condition of approval, if the Board is inclined to approve the application.
Chairman Stutts read a letter of support from John Spratt, 60 Lyme Street.
Jeff Fitton, 6 Elizabeth Lane, spoke in favor of the application. He stated that he has lived in old Lyme since the 1980’s and he would love to see the Kelsey’s plan go forward. He noted that the Kelsey’s could have taken down the building and constructed something out of keeping with the village area. Mr. Fitton stated that he has watched them renovate their property at 62 Lyme Street. He indicated that he agrees with Mr. Spratt’s comments.
David Rahr, 10 Ferry Road, stated that he strongly endorses their application and indicated that it is a well thought out plan.
Pat Spratt, 60 Lyme Street, indicated that she is also in favor of the application.
Bob Peterson, 4 McCurdy Road, indicated that he is in favor of the application. He stated that he understands the reasons for needing the two third-story dormers.
Joan Fitton, 6 Elizabeth Lane, stated that she, too, is in favor of the proposal. She indicated that she is very happy they are restoring the structure and not tearing it down.
No one present spoke in opposition. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Stutts called this Public Hearing to a close.
ITEM 4: Open Voting Session
Case 07-18 Robert Asselin, 2 Bank Road
Chairman Stutts noted that the application is incomplete.
A motion was made by Richard Moll, seconded by Judy McQuade and voted unanimously to deny Case 07-18, Robert Asselin, 2 Bank Road, variance to construct a second floor thereby increasing a nonconforming use.
Reasons:
1. Application is incomplete.
2. Applicant was not present.
Case 07-19 Sapia, 128 Boston Post Road
Chairman Stutts noted that the property is 15,000 square feet in an R-20 zone. She noted that the house is undersized at 748 square feet of living area. Chairman Stutts stated that converting the 14’ x 20’ garage to living space would bring the home above the minimum standard for a one-story home and thereby eliminate an existing nonconformity. Chairman Stutts stated that the house will continue to have only two bedrooms. She noted the hardship provided is that the house was constructed in 1954 and there is no land available for expansion. Chairman Stutts stated that all bulk requirements have been met, a variance is only required of Section 8.9.3, no additions on a nonconforming lot.
Mr. St. Germain stated that the additional living area eliminates a nonconformity. Chairman Stutts stated that there are a number of homes in the area that appear to have converted their garages to living space so it fits in with the neighborhood.
Mr. Moll noted that the proposal does fit well into the neighborhood. He noted that he is concerned that they may eventually want a garage, but noted that they have owned the property since 1992 and most certainly know they would rather have the additional living area. Mr. Moll indicated that the Sapia’s are trying to get better use of the existing space.
A motion was made by Richard Moll, seconded by Joe St. Germain and voted unanimously to grant the necessary variances to convert the garage to living space, 128 Boston Post Road, Sapia, applicant, Case 07-19.
Reasons:
1. Reduces nonconformity by bringing undersized house up to code.
2. Consistent with neighborhood.
3. No coverage or setback variances required.
4. Within the intent of the Plan of Zoning.
Case 07-20 David Kelsey, 12 Ferry Road
Chairman Stutts noted that the major change from the previous application in April is that instead of one larger dormer going across the entire structure there are now two smaller dormers that are 30 inches out from the existing knee wall. She indicated that the hardship provided was that the rear of the structure is not accessible except by walking through the bathroom. Chairman Stutts stated that one dormer addition was needed to relocate the bathroom slightly and allow for a hallway to the rear space. She indicated that the second dormer will accommodate the heating system. Chairman Stutts stated that there were a number of people who spoke in favor of the application, noting that the integrity of the structure is being maintained on the outside and the inside is being brought to modern
standards.
Chairman Stutts stated that the bedrooms are being reduced from five to four and a new septic system is being installed. Mr. St. Germain stated that it should be noted that an alternative would be for them to tear down the structure and build a new structure that would not have to come before this Board.
Ms. McQuade indicated that the current request is very reasonable. She stated that all the neighbors seem very much in approval and supportive of the proposal. Ms. McQuade noted that the narrowness of the structure makes this request very reasonable.
Chairman Stutts stated that there was much discussion on the ambiguity of the Regulations in regards to attics and 2 and ½ stories. She noted that they have minimized the impact of making the third story usable by only adding 30 inches on either side.
Mr. Moll noted that constructing the third floor staircase to code also took some of the existing living area on the third floor. He indicated that the original house was not well constructed, as he toured the home. Mr. Moll noted that it had many deficiencies and it is a good thing for the future that some one is putting the home in order. He stated that it is not in the Historic District, but is a gateway to the district and the Town has been given a second chance with its restoration. Mr. Moll stated that he would request that the home be limited to four bedrooms, as proposed. He indicated that he would also like to see elevation drawings of each side of the structure and a detail on the dormer. Mr. Moll noted that the elevation drawings submitted are not detailed and do not show
dimensions.
A motion was made by seconded by and voted unanimously to grant the necessary variances to construct two third-floor dormers, 12 Ferry Road, Case 07-20, David Kelsey, applicant, with the following conditions:
1. Home is limited to four bedrooms.
2. A complete set of elevation drawings, showing all four sides of the structure, to be submitted and reviewed and approved by the Chairman.
Reasons:
1. Proposal is in keeping with the neighborhood.
2. Number of bedrooms reduced from five to four.
3. New septic system to be installed.
4. Proposal is within the intent of the Plan of Zoning.
ITEM 5: Minutes
A motion was made by Richard Moll, seconded by Kip Kotzan and voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the May 8, 2007 Regular Meeting as corrected.
ITEM 6: Any New or Old Business
Mr. Moll stated that the Board spent a lot of time on Case 07-15 on Sea Spray Avenue. He noted that the home is in the flood zone and there are extensive modifications which cannot exceed 50% of the assessed value of the home. Mr. Moll stated that he would like a response from the ZEO in writing that the cost of improvements is within the requirements. Chairman Stutts noted that the Board denied the application. She stated that it is not the function of the ZEO, but rather the building official that would enforce the 50 percent rule.
Mr. Moll stated that there are now two big rocks at the site on 12 Binney Road. He indicated that he asked at the Town Hall today whether safety conditions are addressed at construction sites. Mr. St. Germain stated that excavations on private properties have nothing to do with the Town. He noted that if the whole is more than two feet deep there better be a ladder. Mr. Moll stated that the Building Inspector, Ron Rose, told him that a fence should be put around the excavation. He noted that the hole has been on the property at 12 Binney Road since the winter. Mr. Moll stated that some one in the Town should address this. Chairman Stutts stated that she is not policing the building department. Ms. McQuade questioned whether Mr. Moll told Mr. Rose that 12 Binney Road had a
problem. Mr. Moll stated that he did and that he asked Mr. Rose to look into it. Ms. McQuade stated that she would think that Mr. Rose should take care of the situation.
ITEM 7: Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:26 p.m. on a motion by Judy McQuade and seconded by Richard Moll. So voted unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan J. Bartlett
Recording Secretary
| 
