OLD LYME ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
Monday, August 10, 2009
The Old Lyme Zoning Commission held a Regular Meeting on Monday, August 10, 2009, at 7:30 p.m. in the Auditorium of Memorial Town Hall. Those present and voting were Jane Cable, Acting Chairman, Jane Marsh, Secretary, John Johnson, Patrick Looney, Beth Sullivan (alternate) and Ted Kiritsis (alternate). Also present were Ann Brown, Zoning Enforcement Officer and Eric Knap, Commission Counsel.
Acting Chairman Cable called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. She noted that Beth Sullivan would be seated for John Johnson. She immediately recessed the Regular Meeting to conduct the Public Hearing. The Regular Meeting reconvened at 8:00 p.m.
1. Status of Tolchinski Property.
Attorney Geraghty stated that the Zoning Enforcement Officer’s letter indicates that she believes there are some outstanding items. He noted that one of the items that he debates is the septic system and whether or not the Zoning Enforcement Officer has enforcement authority. Attorney Geraghty stated that in 2003 the Zoning Commission approved a site plan to add a garage. He noted that both the proposed garage and the existing dwelling connected to an existing septic system on the property. Attorney Geraghty reiterated that this plan was approved. He explained that in order to address drainage concerns a trench or swale was put along the property line. He stated that this was not submitted as a formal application, just a conceptual plan, but in the end it was not done in part
because Mr. Rose felt that it was inappropriate. Attorney Geraghty stated that on July 4, 2007, the existing system failed and at that time Mr. Girard developed a plan that was approved by Mr. Rose and this plan showed two new systems which were installed.
Attorney Geraghty stated that the Zoning Enforcement Officer subsequently issued a cease and desist because the septic system did not meet the approved site plan. Mr. Kiritsis questioned why a grease trap was installed. Mr. Tolchinski replied that he installed a grease trap because he hoped to one day open a food type business in the store. Attorney Geraghty noted that they appealed the Cease and Desist to the Zoning Board of Appeals and were upheld. He indicated that after this decision Mr. Rose issued two permits to discharge. Attorney Geraghty stated that because it was approved by Mr. Rose, incorrectly or not. He explained that Mr. Rose asked him to remove about 10 feet of galleys which he did because of a separation issue. Attorney Geraghty stated that Mr. Tolchinski would
like to get his CO.
Attorney Geraghty stated that Ms. Brown’s letter of July 2009 also indicates that there is a problem with the height. He stated that he is looking for direction from the Commission on how Mr. Tolchinski can move forward and get his CO.
Attorney Geraghty indicated that he has a lot of respect for Tom Metcalf, the Commission’s engineer, but felt his recent comments on the site plan should have been submitted in 2007, not 2009. Mr. Kiritsis questioned whether there were any changes to the plans since 2007. Attorney Geraghty replied that there were not. Ms. Cable indicated that there is a letter from Mr. Metcalf dated 2007 addressing the septic system issues. Attorney Geraghty stated that the issue is whether Ms. Brown has the authority to not issue a CO based on the septic. He noted that Mr. Tolchinski spent a considerable amount of money constructing a septic system based on plans that were approved by the Town Sanitarian.
Acting Chairman Cable stated that part of the problem is that every set of plan shows different building heights and several things that are shown have not been completed. She noted that it is impossible, without an as-built, to determine whether the site plan complies with the approval. Attorney Geraghty replied that he would like to keep all the issues separate. He indicated that he is discussing the septic system at this time. He indicated that Mr. Girard will address the height. Attorney Geraghty stated that the septic issues are not for this Commission to determine. Mr. Johnson questioned why the galley was put in on the west side of the property. Attorney Geraghty stated that it was put in to be used as part of the system and Mr. Rose stated that it was too close and
approved it to only handle run-off from the roof and to keep that water off the neighboring property and Swan Avenue.
Ms. Marsh stated that when she gives approval on a site plan it includes everything, including things that other people at Town Hall have to also approve. She stated that the biggest problem on this site, with the multiple site plans, is losing the ability to know what is on it. Attorney Geraghty indicated that that information is on the as built. Ms. Cable pointed out that they have not received an as built plan. Attorney Geraghty stated that they would like to get to the as-built and CO. He indicated that the only authority the Zoning Commission would have concerning a septic system would be if it were located in the setback. Ms. Marsh stated that the Zoning Commission may have approved the site plan with the septic location in one location because parking is located in another area. She indicated that they do not approve the septic system themselves, they need and require to know where the septic system is on a site in relation to other site improvements. Attorney
Geraghty stated that the Zoning Regulations are clear that the Zoning Commission does not control septic systems. Ms. Cable pointed out that they are not looking to control the septic system, they are asking for a plan with the septic system location.
Attorney Geraghty stated that the existing septic system failed after approval of the site plan. He indicated that the new septic systems have been approved by the Town Sanitarian. Ms. Marsh noted that septic improvements can change drainage, which is a Commission concern. Attorney Geraghty stated that the reason the Sanitarian allowed Mr. Tolchinski to leave the galleys was for that exact reason. Ms. Cable stated that Zoning didn’t get to review that.
Attorney Knapp stated that he concurs that septic systems are approved by the Health Department. He noted that Attorney Geraghty has indicated that a portion of the originally approved septic system is no longer part of the septic system but is being used for drainage/run-off. He explained that once those galleys are no longer part of the septic system, are they under the jurisdiction of Ron Rose or some other jurisdiction. Mr. Girard stated that he believes if the drainage system was above ground it would be a Zoning Commission concern. He indicated that this is a subsurface groundwater detention system and would be within the jurisdiction of the Town Sanitarian. Attorney Knapp stated typically underground drainage is approve by Special Permit by the Zoning Commission. Mr. Girard
stated that he does not see anything in the Old Lyme Zoning Regulations that indicate that the Zoning Commission has jurisdiction on subsurface groundwater detention systems. Attorney Geraghty stated that the goal is to get Mr. Tolchinski a CO and they would be willing to supply the Zoning Commission with additional information on the drainage system, if necessary.
Mr. Looney questioned whether Item #4 in the handout has been resolved. Attorney Geraghty stated that the grease trap location was approved by Ron Rose on the basis that the building was on a slab.
Mr. Girard stated that when this project was started the existing system was found to be non-functional and a new plan was developed. He indicated that when it was determined that the galleys could not be used for the septic system, it was decided to use them for drainage. Mr. Girard stated that the plans were changed and submitted to the Zoning Commission. He indicated that the statement that the Commission’s engineer cannot follow the changes is bogus. Acting Chairman Cable questioned what plan Mr. Girard was referring too. Mr. Girard stated that the plans dated October 2007 are amended and filed for the purpose of indicating that they changed the approved site plan. Acting Chairman Cable questioned whether the plan was revised after October 2007. Mr. Girard replied that
it was not. She questioned what Mr. Metcalf was referring to when he noted a 2008 plan. Mr. Girard stated that it is an as built plan, it is the same as the 2007 plan. He indicated that this all occurred because the existing system failed and had to replaced right away.
Mr. Girard stated that he became involved in 2007 when the foundation was in and the building was basically constructed. He noted that Mr. Tolchinski was under a C&D for the height of the building. Mr. Girard stated that at that time drawings were submitted showing the height of the building calculated from the average grade or 29’11” above the average grade. He noted that in July 2008 another surveyor indicated that the height of the structure was 34’. Mr. Girard noted that it is unfortunate, but he stands by his survey. Ms. Brown asked that Mr. Girard put his explanation of the height confusion in writing. Mr. Girard stated that he does not want to leave this evening with there being any confusion. Mr. Looney stated that the original grade is the grade that
he should be working with. Mr. Girard stated that he will submit a written explanation regarding the height measurement.
Acting Chairman Cable noted that Ms. Brown’s letter requests notification and new drawings if the septic system is further changed so that it can be evaluated in relation to the site plan approval.
Ms. Cable noted that the next issue in Ms. Brown’s letter is parking spaces. She noted that only five parking spaces have been approved. She noted that the dumpster pad and dumpster have not been located. Mr. Tolchinski stated that the dumpster pad has been installed, but not the dumpster. Ms. Cable stated that it should be completed because it is shown on the 2008 as-built. She noted that the trees depicted on the approved site plan and the as-built drawing does not show trees. Mr. Tolchinski stated that the trees would block access to the dumpster and pointed on the site plan where he does intend to plant a tree. Mr. Tolchinski stated that he has put down the topsoil and seeded. Ms. Cable indicated that the as-built site plan should accurately reflect what is on the
site. She noted that the parking is not accurate on the as-built. Mr. Looney stated that if Mr. Tolchinski wants a CO he should complete the site plan improvements and if he wants to add new parking that would be a new application. Ms. Marsh stated that there are two trees shown on the approved plan and not on the as-built drawing. She indicated that Mr. Tolchinski has stated that he does not want to put these trees on the plan because of future parking plans and the Commission needs to make a decision on whether to relieve him of this requirement. Attorney Geraghty indicated that they would plant the trees.
Acting Chairman Cable stated that the next comment of Ms. Brown’s is whether the subsurface systems are located where they are shown on the improvement location survey or the as-built plan. Attorney Geraghty stated that they are located where shown and the only question is whether the Commission wants them to shorten the galleys and if so a new plan would have to be drawn to show that. Mr. Girard stated that he will update the 2008 as-built to show the dimensions of the subsurface system.
Ms. Brown questioned whether the Commission wanted the galleries shortened. Mr. Looney suggested that Mr. Metcalf be given the calculations so that he could verify them. Attorney Geraghty acknowledged that this evening’s discussion was worthwhile, the improvements will move forward and the plans will be updated.
Attorney Geraghty stated that Mr. Scarfo has asked Mr. Tolchinski to construct a retaining wall. He indicated that he is not asking permission for that this evening but wanted to make the Commission aware that they were planning it.
Dominick Scarfo stated that there is a drainage issue on the site. He indicated that Mr. Tolchinski’s property has been substantially raised during this project. He stated that fill was brought onto the site. Mr. Scarfo stated that he wants to make sure that the retaining wall is a few inches onto Mr. Tolchinski’s property. Ms. Cable noted that the retaining wall will not be part of this site plan. She explained that they want to finish this as-built plan and in the meantime they can move forward with planning the retaining wall. Ms. Cable stated that it most likely will not even come before the Commission. Ms. Brown warned that the Commission cannot guarantee that a retaining wall will be approved. Mr. Scarfo noted that the basement, which was not approved by
the Commission, is not helping the drainage problem.
Mr. Scarfo stated that he was not aware that the dumpster was so close to their property. He indicated that his father is concerned about the smell. Ms. Cable noted that the dumpster will be screened. Mr. Scarfo stated that he is concerned about future parking spaces and the use of the building. Ms. Cable noted that there are currently five parking spaces and the structure has an approved use. She indicated that if there are future applications he will have the opportunity to comment.
2. Special Permit Application/Coastal Site Plan Review to permit renovations and expansion at Lyme-Old Lyme High School, 69 Lyme Street, Regional School District No. 18.
John Rhodes, Director of Facilities for Lyme/Old Lyme Schools stated that they would like to give a few highlights of the plan. Mr. Richard Webb, the landscape architect gave a brief presentation.
He explained that they have already submitted to the Inland Wetlands Commission. He noted that the plan is to construct additions to the high school. He explained the proposed site plan, noting that the ball fields would be relocated. He noted that there are only four additional parking spaces and there are no additional students or faculty anticipated with the additions.
The Commission discussed the large agenda for September and agreed to set the Public Hearing for October.
A Motion was made by John Johnson, seconded by Jane Cable and voted unanimously to receive the Special Permit/Coastal Site Plan Application to permit renovations and expansion at Lyme-Old Lyme High School, 69 Lyme Street, Regional School District No. 18, applicant, and to set the Public Hearing for the October 14, 2009 Regular Meeting.
3. Special Permit Application to convert to year round use and installation of 172 seats within the existing Church structure on property located at 287 Shore Road, Shoreline Church, Inc., applicant.
No action taken. The Public Hearing for this item has been continued to the September 14, 2009 Regular Meeting.
4. Petition to amend the Old Lyme Zoning Regulations, Section 4.10 Conservation Zone Requirement, Gateway, regarding height, in accordance with recommendation of the Connecticut River Gateway Commission, Town of Old Lyme Zoning Commission, applicant.
No action taken. The Public Hearing for this item has been continued to the September 14, 2009 Regular Meeting.
5. 83 Hartford Avenue, Sugar Shack, Commission to amend its April 14, 2008 approval with respect to condition number “4. Mechanical equipment must be boxed/shielded from view.” Applicant unable to box or shield in conjunction with the letter received from the Fire Marshal dated June 10, 2009.
Ms. Cable stated that she spoke with the Fire Marshal who explained why the fence could not be located to shield the mechanical equipment. Mr. Looney indicated that he too spoke with the Fire Marshal and the concern was that the fence might be installed with flammable materials. He stated that they could use non-combustible material and if not could the Fire Marshal submit separation distances. Mr. Looney stated that he cautioned the Commission before it was approved that it would be very large. Ms. Sullivan indicated that she does not think a fence will make it look better. Ms. Cable recommended that the Commission relieve Mr. Grills of this condition of approval. The Commission agreed that the vending machine on the property should be removed immediately. Mr. Johnson stated that
he does not recall seeing a drawing that depicted mechanicals as large as they are. The drawing was reviewed by the Commission and it was determined that the mechanicals were not shown as large as they were constructed.
A Motion was made by Jane Marsh, seconded by Ted Kiritsis and voted to relieve the applicant of the responsibility to construct a visual barrier because the Fire Marshal has advised it must be eliminated for safety reasons; the vending machine must be removed immediately. Motion carried 3:2, with Mr. Johnson and Mr. Looney voting against.
6. Finalized version of Registry Regulations, Public Hearing set for September 14, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. in the auditorium.
The Public Hearing for this item is scheduled for Monday, September 14, 2009.
7. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of July 13, 2009 and the Special Meeting of July 27, 2009.
A Motion was made by Jane Marsh, seconded by Pat Looney and voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the July 13, 2009 Regular Meeting and Public Hearing and the July 27, 2009 Special Meeting.
8. Any new or old business
None.
9. Correspondence
None.
10. Zoning Enforcement
a. Zoning Enforcement Report
The Commission reviewed the report.
Ms. Brown stated that Mr. Johnston would like to install a lift on his dock for his new sailboat. She indicated that she has not received a plan yet from Keith Neilson.
b. Site Inspection Report
No report.
11. Miscellaneous/Adjourn
The Meeting adjourned at 9:36 p.m. on a motion by Pat Looney; seconded by John Johnson and voted unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan J. Bartlett
Recording Secretary
| 
