Old Lyme CT - Zoning Commission Regular Minutes 04/12/04

Zoning Commission Regular Minutes 04/12/04

UNAPPROVED

OLD LYME ZONING COMMISSION

MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING

Monday, April 12, 2004

The Old Lyme Zoning Commission held its Regular Meeting on Monday, April 12, 2004 in the auditorium of Memorial Town Hall. Members present were Ted Kiritsis (Chairman), Joan Bozek (arrived at 7:50 p.m.), Jane Marsh (Secretary), Tom Risom, Howard Tooker (Alternate), John Johnson (Alternate) and Steve Ames (Alternate - seated). Also present was Ann Brown, Zoning Enforcement Officer.

1. Convene Meeting; announcement of voting alternates.

Chairman Kiritsis called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

2. Discussion on Proposed Gateway Regulations.

Linda Krause, CREPA, and Judy Preston, CREPA and Gateway Commission, who has worked extensively with the Nature Conservatory and the Old Saybrook Conservation Commission and Land Trust, were present to explain the proposed regulations. Ms. Krause explained that one of Ms. Preston’s tasks is the implementation of these new standards. She stated that the new standards, as adopted, were sent to the Commission, along with a cover letter that discussed the concerns raised at the Public Hearing. Ms. Krause explained that one of the concerns expressed by Towns was the square footage that would generate a Special Permit. She noted that it was raised from 3,500 square feet to 4,000 square feet. Ms. Krause stated that the Gateway Commission has offered to assist in the Towns’ review and offering to draft the language to incorporate this change into their Regulations. She added that they would also be glad to do some mapping. Ms. Krause stated that there was a request from a member of the Essex Zoning Commission that there be an exemption for houses that could not be seen from the River. She stated that a GIS person is currently working on the mapping. Ms. Krause stated that another concern was the administration of the Special Permit process. She noted that the Gateway Commission is prepared to help with the Site Plan review, prepare reports and testify at Public Hearings if the Towns’ want guidance. She stated that they are also prepared to testify at the Public Hearing when the Town adopts these new standards.

Ms. Krause stated that the Gateway Commission members would like to be more involved with the Towns, to the extent that the Towns are willing. Ms. Krause stated that Gateway is not a foreign body imposing standards on the Town, it is a growth from the member Towns for mutual protection of the river.

Ms. Krause stated that the new standards were started in January of 1999 and were completed in February, 2004. She pointed out that the Statutes require the Towns to adopt the new standards promptly, although there is no penalty for not doing so timely. She noted that this is a cooperative venture and Gateway’s job is to help these eight Towns for their mutual benefit.

Mr. Johnson stated that the Old Lyme Zoning Commission had discussed that the 100’ setback was more restrictive than they wanted. He questioned whether this was taken into consideration. Ms. Krause stated that it was difficult to work with eight Towns with eight different opinions. She noted that most other Towns felt the setback should be greater. Ms. Krause noted that the vegetative buffer is a tool being used increasingly to protect water quality and erosion. She noted that fifty feet in from the water, which was the original setback, on many lots was half way up the hill and the location made houses hang over the crest of the bluff in the most visible place. She noted that the Gateway Commission again tried to balance what all the Towns wanted.

Ms. Krause stated that she would like the Commission’s approval to draft the standards as they would fit into Old Lyme’s Regulations and request that the Zoning Commission set a public hearing for adoption.

Joan Bozek arrived at this time.

3. Special Exception Modification Application, Restaurant Liquor Permit Application, 90 Halls Road, Old Lyme Marketplace, Sherlock 221, Lynne Sherlock, applicant. Receive.

Attorney David Condon was present to represent the applicant, Lynne Sherlock. He explained that a Special Exception is required in Old Lyme for liquor permits and one was obtained for a full liquor permit for the prior establishment at the location Anne’s Bistro. Attorney Condon noted that no conditions were set on that permit and the question is whether that was truly a full liquor permit or whether it was conditioned at all. He stated that since that time a café permit was sought, approved and obtained, and after the fact they were informed that a café permit is something prohibited under the Zoning Regulations. Attorney Condon stated that a full liquor permit was issued without condition, and in a way they are seeking to limit that, or take less than what is allowed by specifically requesting a restaurant liquor permit.

Chairman Kiritsis stated that when the liquor permit was issued to Anne’s Bistro, it was for a tavern permit or limited beer and wine service only. He stated that when Ms. Sherlock obtained her original permit it was for a tavern permit and 30 days later applied for a café permit. Chairman Kiritsis stated that the Zoning Enforcement Officer was not empowered to issue the café permit because it constituted a change in use.

Chairman Kiritsis stated that the Zoning Regulations require a 1500-foot separation for liquor serving establishments. He explained that when a liquor permit was originally issued for this location, it was specifically stated that the permit was for beer and wine only, with no bar service.

A Public Hearing is scheduled for May 10, 2004 at 7:30 p.m.

At 8:05 p.m., Chairman Kiritsis recessed the Regular Meeting to conduct the Public Hearing. Chairman Kiritsis reconvened the Regular Meeting at 9:15 p.m.

4. Site Plan Application to construct a 15,000 square foot manufacturing facility at 61-1 Buttonball Road, Ronald Swaney, applicant. Receive.

Morgan Malin, professional engineer, was present to represent Mr. Swaney. He explained that this proposal was previously approved on November 25, 2002, with conditions. Mr. Malin submitted a letter from Mr. Swaney requesting a waiver of the application fee. He explained that the approval expired, as Mr. Swaney did not begin construction because he did not have a tenant. Chairman Kiritsis questioned whether the use has changed. Mr. Malin explained that the proposed use is for lawn maintenance associated with the golf course and the original tenant was for light manufacturing. Mr. Malin stated that he believes the use of the facility would be sunrise to sunset and would obviously be seasonal.

Ms. Brown stated that the applicant has asked the Wetlands Commission whether the existing permit would apply to this new application.

Ms. Bozek stated that the Statement of Use should reflect the hours of operation and what would be stored in the facility. She noted that the number of employees is also important. Chairman Kiritsis read the Statement of Use provided, which indicated that the hours of operation would be 24/7. Ms. Bozek stated that one of the concerns with the prior tenant was traffic and noted that she would be interested in information in this regard. Mr. Risom stated that it might be useful to have someone from the golf course present to discuss the use.

A Public Hearing for this item was scheduled for the Regular Meeting on Monday, May 10, 2004 at 7:30 p.m.

5. Site Plan/Special Exception Modification Application to construct a parish complex, 1 McCurdy Road, The Church of Christ the King, applicant. Receive.

Bob Sullivan, Construction Project Manager, was present to represent the applicant. He explained that they have obtained permission from the Department of Transportation for an access from Route 156 and the necessary bonds and permits will be filed. Mr. Sullivan stated that the Town Engineer had a concern about the elevation of the drainage system. He noted that Mr. Hendriks would address this issue. Mr. Hendriks stated that he and Tom Metcalf and Ms. Brown met several times over the last few months. He noted that he asked Ms. Brown to review the plans to ensure that all of the conditions of approval had been addressed by the applicant. Mr. Hendriks noted that Ms. Brown asked Mr. Metcalf to review the plans also and he has concurred that all the conditions have been met. He explained that Mr. Metcalf noted that the proposed site grading along the western boundary line of the proposed parking area near the retaining wall area had been raised approximately 1.5 feet. He explained that the ground water table has been monitored further and they have found that it would be prudent to raise the proposed detention galleries. Mr. Hendriks stated that no other elevations have been changed. He explained that raising the parking lot in this area puts the elevation of the retaining wall to between 4 and 6 feet, instead of 2.5 to 4.5 feet. Ms. Marsh pointed out that this would mean that the lights in this area have been raised an additional 1.5 feet and Mr. Hendriks agreed. He noted that the lights are pointed downward and are the same lights that were originally approved. Mr. Hendriks stated that the lights are 100-watt metal haloid lights in a bell-shaped aluminum housing. Mr. Johnson expressed concern with the lights. Chairman Kiritsis stated that they could revisit the lighting.

Mr. Sullivan stated that the Historic District Commission Certificate of Appropriateness is on file. He submitted a copy of the Historic District Commission’s meeting discussing the signs, fencing and lighting and these minutes indicate that all has been approved. Ms. Marsh questioned whether any of these items were changed from what the Zoning Commission originally approved. Mr. Sullivan replied that none of these items were changed.

Mr. Sullivan stated that the fence on the Hornby side of the property would be constructed as detailed on the drawings. He indicated that the Church is requesting that the fence not be constructed until six weeks into the construction process.

Mr. Sullivan stated that the next issue is the fence and retaining wall along the Luddington property. He stated that the current plans show a fence to be installed along the property line and Mr. Luddington expressed concerns about this fence. Mr. Sullivan stated that Mr. Luddington would prefer to have a planting screen that would be sufficiently high and thick to provide a screen and recognizing the construction process he would be agreeable to the plantings being installed in the early fall. Mr. Sullivan stated that Mr. Luddington has agreed to this in writing. He noted that the Church is interested in satisfying the concerns of both the Commission and the neighboring property owners.

Mr. Sullivan stated that the church would like to start construction as soon as possible, hopefully by the end of April.

Ms. Bozek questioned whether the Commission is considering these changes major modifications that would require a Public Hearing, or are they considering the proposal without Public Hearing. Chairman Kiritsis stated that it would be up to the Commission as a group, but he would indicate that it would be the later. Ms. Brown stated that Mr. Hendriks submitted a formal application for modification because of the grade change. Chairman Kiritsis stated that he would like to see the applicant change the lighting if it has not been purchased. Mr. Risom pointed out that the proposed lights are white, not yellow, and are only 100 watts.

Ms. Bozek questioned whether Mr. Metcalf has approved the drainage in regards to the revised grade. Ms. Brown noted that he has not submitted anything in writing, as he had expected to get a final sheet with landscaping from Mr. Hendriks. She stated that Mr. Metcalf expressed to her that it would be fine and there seemed to be justification to raise the grade because of the groundwater monitoring. Ms. Brown stated that Mr. Metcalf also felt that the Commission should be aware of the fact that the elevation of the parking lot is higher and would raise not only the parking lot, but the lights. Chairman Kiritsis pointed out that Mr. Luddington, in February 2003, sent a letter requesting that the lights be lowered from 12’ to 36” or 42” throughout. Mr. Sullivan stated that they have not reduced the height of the lights. He pointed out that reducing the height too much might not provide safe lighting levels. Mr. Hendriks pointed out that there are only five lights along that property line. He noted that they performed a photometric study of the site and all the lighting is within the close proximity to the actual usage and the light fixtures are situated so that they provide a cone that doesn’t quite touch, although it is recommended that the cones overlap. Mr. Hendriks stated that if the height were reduced more lights would be required to provide safe lighting.

Chairman Kiritsis stated that Mr. Luddington expressed certain requirements for being in agreement with the changes. Ms. Brown asked that Mr. Luddington’s request be read. Ms. Marsh stated that Mr. Luddington’s letter of February 2003 states that he remains concerned about the 12’ lights and formally requested that the light fixtures be reduced to 36” or 42” fixtures throughout, and if that is unsuitable, the shorter lights be used just around the perimeter. Ms. Brown explained that Mr. Luddington more recently, April 8, 2004, agreed to the specified changes but again expressed his request to reduce the height of the lights. Mr. Sullivan stated that he would be willing to speak to his lighting experts about reducing the height, but he does not believe they can be reduced more than 2 feet without having to add additional fixtures. Mr. Sullivan stated that the church lights will not be on at all times. He indicated that the lights will be on ½ hour before a function and will be turned off ½ hour after the function ends. Mr. Hendriks explained that the lights would be on different circuits so that all the lights do not have to be on at once if there is a small function.

Mr. Hendriks stated that he would like to file the mylars of the approved plans so that they may get a permit and begin construction. He explained that they would like to modify the approval as requested this evening. Mr. Sullivan stated that because they have an agreement with the Hornby’s that they are agreeable to the fence being constructed simultaneously with the construction on the site and a similar comment from Mr. Luddington, they would like to proceed with the general grading and excavation for foundations with the Commission’s approval. He noted that he understands that the Commission wants more time to consider the changes on the Luddington side of the property.

Ms. Bozek stated that she believes that the issues need to be dealt with separately, as she would like to be sure that Mr. Luddington knows that the parking lot is being raised 1.5 feet.

Motion for approval by Tom Risom, seconded by Joan Bozek and voted unanimously to approve the following minor modifications requested as part of the Site Plan/Special Exception Modification Application, 1 McCurdy Road, the Church of Christ the King, applicant, to allow the applicant to begin construction on the site:

a. Modify the construction schedule for the fence on the east side (Hornby side) to be completed within 6 weeks of the start of construction.

b. To modify the elevation of the parking lot on the west side to that which is shown on the plans of August 25, 2003.

c. To accept that the screening on the west side will not be installed until the Fall of 2004.

The Commission agreed to discuss the lighting and the type of screening to be used on the west side at a future date. Mr. Hendriks stated that he would like to be on the May agenda to discuss these items further.

6. Site Plan/Special Exception Application to reconstruct the transfer station per DEP Consent Order of 2002, 109 Four Mile River Road, Town of Old Lyme, applicant.

No action taken as the Public Hearing has been held open to the May 10, 2004 Regular Meeting.

7. Site Plan/Special Exception Application to construct a 5’ x 100’ dock and a 5’ x 5’ platform, 5 Beaulieu Drive, Wesley Poriotis, applicant.

Ms. Bozek stated that the issue of protecting public access was discussed at public hearing. She questioned whether Zoning Boards have a direction to protect public access, which the DEP did not have here. Ms. Brown stated that docks are exempt from CAM reviews. Ms. Marsh stated that she would like to see a condition regarding the lighting, such as 25 watt lighting to light the deck surface only. She indicated that she would also light to see the color limited to a natural color.

A motion was made by Jane Marsh, seconded by Joan Bozek and voted unanimously to approve the Site Plan/Special Exception Application to construct a 5’ x 100’ dock and 5’ x 5’ platform, 5 Beaulieu Drive, Wesley Poriotis, applicant, as follows:

Whereas, the Zoning Commission has received applications for Site Plan and Special Exception approvals, one sheet titled, “Site Development Plan Showing Proposed Improvements Prepared for Wesley Poriotis, Ferry Road, Old Lyme, Connecticut”, as prepared by Angus McDonald/Gary Sharpe & Associates, Inc., Old Saybrook, Connecticut and dated February 17, 2004, with revisions through March 25, 2004;

Whereas, the Zoning Commission has held a duly noticed public hearing on April 12, 2004, and the commission has heard testimony from both citizens of Old Lyme and the applicant; and

Whereas, the proposed use is permitted by Special Exception under the Old Lyme Zoning Regulations, the Commission finds that the applicant has provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate compliance with the technical provisions Section 31.2 of the Regulations with the following conditions:

25 watt to light deck surface only.

Colors – earth tone/natural only.

Whereas, the Commission finds that the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the General Standards of Section 31.3, in particular that the proposed use, buildings and other structures and site development are designed and arranged as follows:

to achieve safety, comfort and convenience;

to conserve as much of the natural terrain and provide for vegetation on the site to the extent practical;

to be in architectural harmony with the surrounding area;

to protect nearby residential and preservation areas;

to show that reasonable consideration has been given to the matter of restoring and protecting the ecosystem and habitat of Long Island Sound and reducing the amount of hypoxia, pathogens, toxic contaminants and floatable debris therein; and

Whereas, the Zoning Commission finds that the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the General Standards of Section 32.9.3, in particular that the proposed use, buildings or other structures and site development conform to the standards of this section.

Whereas, the Zoning Commission has deliberated and considered the evidence presented at the hearing as well as the input of its staff and professional consultants; and

Now, therefore be it resolved that the Old Lyme Zoning Commission grants approval to Wesley Poriotis for the Site Plan/Special Exception applications to construct a dock on property at 5 Beaulieu Drive, Old Lyme, CT.

8. Site Plan/Special Exception Application to construct a dock, 23 Talcott Farm Road, Talcott Farm Association, Inc., applicant.

Ms. Bozek stated that the motion to approve should include a waiver for the side setback. She questioned whether a dock could be a primary use on a property. Ms. Bozek stated that at one time they denied an application for a dock when there was no other principal use on the property. She recognized that when the easement was set up it was for the explicit purpose of providing access to the river. Mr. Risom stated that because the dock is located on an association easement and was established for this purpose, he believes it would be accessory to the association to which there is no principal use. Ms. Marsh indicated that no lighting was proposed.

A motion was made Jane Marsh, seconded by Tom Risom and voted unanimously to approve the Site Plan/Special Exception Application to construct a dock, 23 Talcott Farm Road, Talcott Farm Association, Inc., applicant, as follows:

Whereas, the Zoning Commission has received applications for Site Plan and Special Exception approvals, one sheet titled, “Plot Plan, Lot 27-4 Talcott Farm, 23 Talcott Farm Road, Old Lyme, Connecticut”, as prepared by Stein Survey, Westbrook, Connecticut and dated April 1, 2002, with revisions through April 22, 2002 and design plans prepared by Keith Neilson dated March 5, 2004.

Whereas, the Zoning Commission has held a duly noticed public hearing on April 12, 2004, and the commission has heard testimony from both citizens of Old Lyme and the applicant; and

1. Request to waive setback is granted.

2. The granting of this approval is recognized as an amenity to an association.

to achieve safety, comfort and convenience;

to conserve as much of the natural terrain and provide for vegetation on the site to the extent practical;

to be in architectural harmony with the surrounding area;

to protect nearby residential and preservation areas;

Whereas, the Zoning Commission has deliberated and considered the evidence presented at the hearing as well as the input of its staff and professional consultants; and

Now, therefore be it resolved that the Old Lyme Zoning Commission grants approval to Talcott Farms Association, Inc. for the Site Plan/Special Exception applications to construct a dock on property at 23 Talcott Farm Road, Old Lyme, CT.

9. Site Plan/Special Exception Modification Application to construct a pool, cabana, bathroom and shower facilities, and a snack bar, 40 McCurdy Road, Old Lyme Country Club, Inc., applicant. Receive.

Mr. Sharpe explained the location of the new facilities to the Commission. He noted that the existing house on the property has been removed and the lot has been leveled. Mr. Sharpe stated that he is requesting a waiver of the A-2 survey of the entire parcel. He noted that they have also requested a waiver of topography of the entire site. Ms. Marsh stated that a waiver was also requested to not have to show the electric, telephone and cable on the entire parcel.

Mr. Sharpe stated that there is existing parking and new parking is not proposed. Mr. Johnson questioned whether the club membership would be increasing. Mr. Sharpe replied that he does not know.

This item is scheduled for a Public Hearing at the May 10, 2004 Regular Meeting at 7:30 p.m.

The Commission took a five-minute recess at this time.

10. Approval of Minutes.

A motion was made by Tom Risom, seconded by Joan Bozek and voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the March 3, 2004 Special Meeting.

A motion was made by Tom Risom, seconded by Joan Bozek and voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the March 8, 2004 Regular Meeting and Public Hearing as clarified.

A motion was made by Joan Bozek, seconded by Tom Risom and voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the March 22, 2004 Special Meeting.

11. Zoning Enforcement.

Ms. Brown distributed the Zoning Enforcement Report. Ms. Brown reported that the lean-to addition has been removed at 25 Library Lane. She explained that Dmitry Tolchinsky was issued a cease and desist to stop construction and restore to the design approved by both the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Zoning Commission. Ms. Brown stated that Mr. Tolchinsky has requested to construct a roof to protect the structure during the appeal process. She indicated that she has approved a permit to allow a flat, rubber roof, after first speaking with Attorney Knapp.

12. Regulation Rewrite – Set Special Meeting.

A Regulation Rewrite Meeting has been set for Wednesday, April 28, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. The Commission discussed adding Sherlock 221 to the agenda of this Special Meeting. The Commission agreed that that would not be appropriate and directed Ms. Brown to put together a timeline for discussion at the Public Hearing in May.

13. Correspondence.

None

14. Any new or old business to come before Commission.

Mr. Kiritsis stated that he would like the Commission to consider changing the Public Hearings to begin at 7:30 p.m. The Commission members agreed to try this and Ms. Bozek suggested that all the applicants scheduled this evening for May be made aware of this time change.

Ms. Brown stated that the Commission has officially received two applications this evening that were not received until after the agenda was completed. She noted that the Commission has 65 days to open the Public Hearing.

15. Miscellaneous/Adjourn.

A motion was made by Tom Risom, seconded by Steve Ames and voted unanimously to adjourn at 11:15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Susan J. Bartlett

Recording Secretary