APPROVED
OLD LYME ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARING
Monday, June 11, 2007
The Old Lyme Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing on Monday, June 11, 2007 at 7:30 p.m. in the Phoebe Griffin Noyes Library. Members present were Ted Kiritsis (Chairman), Jane Marsh (Secretary), Jane Cable, John Johnson, Tom Risom (Vice Chairman), Howard Tooker (Alternate) and Steve Ames (Alternate). Also present was Ann Brown, Zoning Enforcement Officer.
Chairman Kiritsis called the Public Hearing to order at 7:32 p.m.
1. Special Exception/Coastal Site Plan Application to construct an Office Complex, 2 Huntley Road, BGP Development, Inc., applicant.
Ms. Brown stated that she told Tony Hendriks that the meeting was at the church and when she realized that she was incorrect she left a message on his cell phone and posted the proper meeting place at both the church and the Town Hall. She asked that the Commission give Mr. Hendriks additional time to get to the meeting.
A motion was made by John Johnson, seconded by Jane Cable and voted unanimously to defer the Public Hearing for the Special Exception/Coastal Site Plan Application to construct an Office Complex, 2 Huntley Road, BGP Development, Inc., applicant, to later in the evening.
2. Petition to Amend the Old Lyme Zoning Regulations, change to Schedule A- 1, Line 15, change use category of building use of facilities for the Town or Regional School District #18 from permitted as a right to Special Exception granted by the Zoning Commission, Old Lyme Zoning Commission applicant.
Ms. Marsh read the legal notice as published in the New London Day on Thursday, May 31 and Thursday, June 7, 2007. She read the Exhibit List for the record.
Ms. Cable stated that it is her understanding that absent this proposed regulation change, Town and Regional School District projects could pass by right with no supervision by the Zoning Commission.
Ms. Brown noted that she suggested the change; she noted that Attorney Branse was surprised that it did not already exist in the Regulations. She explained that currently these projects are allowed by a Zoning Compliance Permit and not site plan or Zoning Commission approval is required. Ms. Brown stated that in the past the Commission has reviewed many school projects because a coastal site plan was required.
No one present spoke in favor or against the proposed amendment. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Kiritsis asked for a motion to close this Public Hearing.
A motion was made by Jane Cable, seconded by John Johnson and voted unanimously to close the Public Hearing for the Petition to Amend the Old Lyme Zoning Regulations, change to Schedule A-1, Line 15, change use category of building use of facilities for the Town or Regional School District #18 from permitted as a right to Special Exception granted by the Zoning Commission, Old Lyme Zoning Commission, applicant.
1. Special Exception/Coastal Site Plan Application to construct an Office Complex, 2 Huntley Road, BGP Development, Inc., applicant.
Chairman Kiritsis noted that Mr. Hendriks was present. Ms. Marsh read the list of exhibits submitted since the May Public Hearing. Mr. Hendriks stated that initially, the 2 Huntley Road site was not part of the 4 Huntley Road site and because of circumstances they were put together. He explained that because of this, there are now Wetlands concerns. Mr. Hendriks stated that at the last Wetlands Commission Meeting they were unable to discuss any of Mr. Metcalf’s concerns. He explained that they had a timing problem and had to withdraw and resubmit to Wetlands. Mr. Hendriks stated that in his letter dated June 7, 2007 and received today, Mr. Metcalf still has some concerns. He noted that they have addressed most of the concerns in Mr. Metcalf’s first letter. Mr.
Hendriks stated that he is aware that there is a time constraint with the Zoning Commission and the hearing must close this evening. He acknowledged that even so, the Zoning Commission cannot take action until they receive a report from the Wetlands Commission.
Mr. Hendriks stated that the properties were joined. He noted that the downstream owner is present this evening and he has concerns that the site is being covered with pavement and buildings and its effect on the wetlands. Mr. Hendriks stated that based upon conversations with Ann Brown and Tom Metcalf, the Old Lyme Zoning Regulations require that they design, put in place and store a 100 year storm on site. He noted that they have never designed to this standard before in Old Lyme. Ms. Brown stated that the Regulation states that it must be designed to the 100 year storm. Mr. Hendriks stated that the revised calculations submitted to the Wetlands Commission should show that the water can be handled. He noted that the subsurface system installed for the project on 4 Huntley Road needs
to be larger and they have redesigned the system. He noted that the one system will handle the entire site.
Mr. Hendriks stated that Mr. Metcalf had a few questions with regard to the architectural plans and the landscaping. He explained that they have doubled the number of trees in the area in question and changed them to arborvitae from pines. Mr. Hendriks stated that they have reduced the size of the building in order to accommodate additional parking toward the rear of the site. He explained that the angle of the parking was also changed to accommodate some of Mr. Metcalf’s concerns with regard to the ability of a car to pull out. Mr. Hendriks stated that they eliminated 520 square feet of the building; it was 34 x 130 and is now 32 x 130’. He pointed out the circular drive in front of the building and noted that there is access all the way around the building. Mr. Hendriks
stated that there was a fence proposed in the rear and it was agreed by all involved that only a partial fence was necessary to leave as much green space as possible.
Mr. Hendriks stated that Mr. Metcalf asks for verification that the two parcels have been combined and Mr. Hendriks indicated that they have been combined. He noted that Mr. Metcalf requested additional spot elevations along Huntley Road, and although they have added some, he would like a few more. Ms. Brown pointed out that Mr. Metcalf feels the driveway is too steep. Mr. Hendriks stated that he has not had a chance to look at that specific concern as he just received the letter from Mr. Metcalf today.
Mr. Hendriks stated that Item 4d of Mr. Metcalf’s letter requests a second look at the proposed contour lines. He noted that the proposal has the back building at grade with the rear of the site and there is no step out of the rear building. He explained that the architectural plans now address the fact that the doors will not open up into the parking area. Ms. Brown stated that Mr. Metcalf may not have reviewed the latest architectural plans.
Mr. Risom stated that it seems unreasonable to expect the applicant to work out his design issues in session, having only received the comments a few hours ago. Chairman Kiritsis agreed and suggested that the application could be withdrawn or acted on by the Commission without prejudice. Mr. Hendriks stated that the applicant would like to start construction in a reasonable amount of time. Ms. Marsh noted that the Public Hearing must be closed this evening. Ms. Brown pointed out that there is a neighbor present this evening that has concerns and he should have the opportunity to comment on any revised plans. Ms. Cable suggested a withdrawal of the application and resubmission. Mr. Risom stated that the applicant received comments from the Town Engineer the night of the meeting.
Ms. Marsh pointed out that the plans were revised through May 21, 2007 so the Engineer did not have very much time to review them.
Mr. Hendriks stated that he has discussed the situation with Mr. Giannotti and they understand workload. Ms. Brown noted that there are many small typos on the plans that may be a result of measuring mistakes, or adding mistakes or such, but as presented they are very difficult for her to evaluate. She indicated that she is not sure what information is correct and what information is not. Ms. Brown stated that Tom Metcalf has 4 or 5 pages of comments and it will be awkward if the public hearing is closed and would put the Commission in a very bad position. She urged the applicant to withdraw the application. Mr. Hendriks stated that in reviewing the comments, he feels they are minor in nature. He indicated that it is unfortunate that Mr. Metcalf took so long in his review of the plans. Chairman Kiritsis pointed out that it is not entirely Mr. Metcalf’s fault, as the time delay is not solely his fault. He endorsed Ms. Brown’s suggestion that the applicant withdraw the
application and resubmit. Mr. Hendriks asked the Commission to consider them withdrawing the application and resubmitting immediately for receipt so that the time clock keeps moving forward. Mr. Johnson stated that assuming the revised plans are perfect, the Commission could probably immediately make a decision, pending neighbor concerns and comments. Mr. Hendriks agreed and noted that it could be at the next Regular Meeting, at which time they will have a Wetlands decision.
Chairman Kiritsis asked for comments from the public.
Mr. Hendriks stated that as part of the 4 Huntley Road development, there was a subsurface drainage system which will be enlarged to take care of the 2 Huntley Road design and with Mr. Metcalf’s concern with the larger storm frequency.
Brian Farnan, resident of Huntley Road, stated that he is concerned with the amount of pavement. He stated that since the building was constructed at 4 Huntley there is a lot more traffic on Huntley Road with some coming the wrong way down the road. Mr. Farnan suggested that Huntley Road be made two, two-way roads with a cul-de-sac, to separate the commercial and residential traffic.
Mr. Tooker indicated that the road should not be blocked off, in case of an emergency. Mr. Farnan stated that it is a very narrow road.
Mr. Hendriks stated that the large rock is located within the Town right-of-way. He noted that the grade, in relationship to Route 156, is in accordance with Town requirements and he worked with John Roach on fixing it many years ago.
Mr. Hendriks stated that he would be willing to withdraw if the Commission is willing to accept a new application by the same motion. Chairman Kiritsis stated that withdrawing is one action and re-submittal is another that starts the clock all over again. Ms. Marsh questioned whether there was a technical problem with this action and questioned what was being accepted as the application. Mr. Hendriks stated that the submission includes the plans dated May 21, 2007.
A motion was made by John Johnson, seconded by Jane Cable and voted unanimously to accept the new application.
The Public Hearing adjourned at 8:31 p.m. on a motion by John Johnson, seconded by Jane Marsh and voted unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan J. Bartlett
Recording Secretary
| 
