APPROVED
OLD LYME ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
The Old Lyme Zoning Commission held a Regular Meeting on Wednesday, October 11, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. in the Auditorium of Memorial Town Hall. Members present were Ted Kiritsis (Chairman), Jane Marsh (Secretary), Jane Cable, John Johnson and Steve Ames (Alternate, seated for Tom Risom). Also present was Ann Brown, Zoning Enforcement Officer.
1. Convene Meeting; announcement of voting alternates.
Chairman Kiritsis called the Regular Meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Chairman Kiritsis immediately recessed the Regular Meeting to conduct the Public Hearing. He reconvened the Regular Meeting at 7:45 p.m.
2. Special Exception Application/Site Plan Modification Application to construct a 40’ x 60’ building to house dewatering equipment, 1 Gouvna Hill Road, The Gouvna Group LLC, applicant.
Ms. Brown stated that she recommends that an as-built plan be submitted at the completion of the project. Ms. Marsh noted that there is an existing concrete slab in the setback on the northerly side of the property. Ms. Cable suggested adding a condition that notes that this slab will not be built upon.
A motion was made by Jane Cable, seconded by John Johnson and voted unanimously to approve the Special Exception Modification Application to construct a 40’ x 60’ building to house dewatering equipment, 1 Gouvna Hill Road, The Gouvna Group LLC, applicant, as follows:
Whereas, the Zoning Commission has received an application for a modification to the Special Exception/Site Plan, one sheet, as prepared by Dennis F. Hallilhan, P.E., LLC, Titled “Site Plan and Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan, Gouvna Group, 1 Gouvna Hill, Old Lyme, CT”, dated 8/7/06 with revisions through 10/9/06;
Whereas, the Zoning Commission has held a duly noticed public hearing on September 11, 2006 and October 11, 2006, and the commission has had an opportunity to hear testimony from both citizens of Old Lyme and the applicant; and
Whereas, the proposed modification is allowed 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 modifications required to be added to the final plan:
1. The concrete slab on the north of the property shall not have a structure built on it.
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:
1. to achieve safety, comfort and convenience;
2. to conserve as much of the natural terrain and provide for vegetation on the site to the extent practical;
3. to be in architectural harmony with the surrounding area;
4. to protect nearby residential and preservation areas;
5. 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 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 The Gouvna Group, LLC, for a modification to the Special Exception/Site Plan, one sheet, as prepared by Dennis F. Hallihan, P.E., LLC, Titled “Site Plan and Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan, Gouvna Group, 1 Gouvna Hill, Old Lyme, CT”, dated 8/7/06 with revisions through 10/9/06, with the modifications specified (if any), and that an As-Built plan must be submitted at the completion of the project.
3. Petition to amend the Old Lyme Zoning Regulations, Proposed new Section 7.4.3.1, Lot adjacent to a Limited Access Highway, Gary Yuknat, applicant. Receipt.
Chairman Kiritsis questioned the term “limited access highway.” Mr. Yuknat indicated that that would mean Interstate 95. Ms. Cable stated that would also include Route 156. Mr. Yuknat stated that this wording would have to be changed. It was suggested to change it to “interstate.” Mr. Yuknat stated that LI-80S is only located on the south side of the highway, the north side is LI-80. Mr. Yuknat stated that the Town will benefit from this change because they will be able to further tax his property when this area is built upon and the other businesses in the LI-80S Zone could further expand for additional taxes.
Ms. Cable noted that this LI-80S zone is the only one in Town and the only limited access highway adjacent to it is I-95. Ms. Marsh indicated that the new Regulations will not have an LI-80S zone, it will all be LI-80. She noted that most of the other LI-80 zones are not near I-95. Ms. Cable stated that the other LI-80 land is by the railroad tracks. Mr. Yuknat noted that this proposed Regulation is modeled after the regulation regarding setbacks against railroad tracks. Ms. Marsh indicated that she would like it say “interstate highway.” Mr. Yuknat agreed that it could be changed to “Interstate 95.”
Mr. Yuknat questioned whether the application fee is $350.00. The Commission replied that it is.
The Commission received the application and set the Public Hearing for the December 11, 2006 Regular Meeting.
4. Zoning Enforcement – Zoning Enforcement Report
Chairman Kiritsis questioned whether Ms. Brown had visited all the sites. She indicated that she had.
Christ the King - Chairman Kiritsis stated that Christ the King was to put in gravel for their overflow parking and they have not. Ms. Brown noted that she does not believe it has been done. She noted that there is quite a bit of grass growing and she is not sure what is underneath. Ms. Brown stated that they are waiting for the money from the sale of their property so that they can afford to do it. Mr. Kiritsis questioned whether a bond was being held. Ms. Brown noted that there is a small bond. Chairman Kiritsis questioned whether money has been released as there does not appear to be incentive enough to do the work. Ms. Brown noted that they got much of the bond back, although the Town is still holding some money. She noted that according to the Commission’s
decision last month, as long as the use has been established, the site plan goes on forever not for 5 years as in the Regulations. Ms. Marsh questioned what Ms. Brown was referring to. Ms. Brown indicated that at the Regulations require that a Special Exception use needs to be established and the work complete within 18 months. She noted that the site plan indicates that the work must be completed in five years or it expires. Ms. Brown stated that at the September 2006 meeting the Commission decided that Kellogg had established their special exception use within 18 months and their site plan is more than five years old. She indicated that the Commission said they could go ahead and put the addition on even though the site plan had expired and because the special exception use had been established. Ms. Marsh stated that the Kellogg project was presented as a phased project and the Church project was not.
Ms. Brown read the approval of the overflow parking for the Church as follows: “The surface of the south overflow parking area shall remain gravel and loam surface and to confirm that the surface of the north overflow parking area must be constructed as originally approved.” She explained that the part toward Route 156 was to be left gravel as they built it and the lot closer to Lyme Street was to be torn up and the paving blocks put down.
Ms. Cable indicated that the church should be notified that their approval will soon lapse and the Town will keep the bond and improve the drainage.
Ms. Marsh stated that in the future when a phased project is presented to the Commission, they should put a time limit for each phase to make it more understandable to the Zoning Enforcement Officer. Ms. Cable questioned whether the Commission had that right when Statutes dictate the time length. Ms. Marsh replied that the Commission does have the right. Ms. Cable questioned what other Statutes the Commission has the right to lift. Ms. Brown stated that usually the Commission is approving a Special Exception Application with a Site Plan attached that is not a separate application. She indicated that she then enforces time limits under the Special Exception rules, not the Site Plan rules. Ms. Brown stated that the five-year plan is not really applicable in most cases.
Ms. Brown stated that she has been in contact with the project manager for the Church, Bob Sullivan. She explained that she would contact them and ask them their plan, although she assumes they are awaiting the sale of the property. Chairman Kiritsis and Mr. Ames indicated that that is not a valid reason. Ms. Cable noted that it will soon be winter and they will not be able to do the work. Ms. Brown indicated that she would contact the Church.
Mountzoures – Chairman Kiritsis stated that the report indicates that an as-built plan has not been submitted. Ms. Brown stated that she has spoken to Mr. Mountzoures and he has indicated that this is in the works. Chairman Kiritsis asked that a letter be written so that they have a paper trail. Ms. Brown noted that they have a conditional certificate of zoning compliance. The Commission agreed that in the future they should require as-builts within 6 months.
Lyme Academy – Ms. Brown noted that a plan must be submitted for the overflow parking. She noted that she sent them a notice reminding them that the parking lot by I-95 should be shut down. Mr. Kiritsis stated that he would also like dates on this Site Review Report so there is a frame of reference over time. He indicated that he would like to know the dates of site visits also.
Hilltop Development – Ms. Brown noted that this applicant has missed a few dates, one being that the bond was to be posted within 90 days of approval, which has not been done. She noted that work must commence within one year of approval and the Special Exception requires that the use be established within 18 months. Ms. Brown stated that the applicant has just received approvals from the State for the water. She noted that the applicant may come in and ask for an extension. Ms. Brown stated that the applicant is aware of the situation.
M. Brett Painting – Project complete.
Country Club – Work has not begun.
Chairman Kiritsis questioned when Ms. Brown last visited 12 Binney Road. She indicated that she was at the site last Friday. Chairman Kiritsis stated that C&D was issued on the 17th of July on 12 Binney Road because she issued a permit on a substandard lot in error. He noted that on July 17, 2006 when he visited the site with Ms. Brown, only boulders had been excavated; he questioned whether additional work had been done after the C&D was issued. Ms. Brown stated that she does not believe so, with the exception of clearing away the excavated material. Chairman Kiritsis stated that the issue at the ZBA meeting was the large hole. He noted that she indicated she was at the site last week and questioned whether there was a large hole. Ms. Brown stated that she did
not go on the property; she just drove by. Chairman Kiritsis stated that driving by a site is not really inspecting the property.
Ms. Brown noted that Mr. Looney has requested that Town employees stay off his property.
Chairman Kiritsis stated that the Town should receive a notice for the activity on Machnik Drive. Ms. Brown stated that Mr. Rose indicated that the trailers were no longer on Town property but on the street. She noted that she has inspected the site and it appears that the trailers are still on the Town property.
Ms. Brown stated that in 1984 the Town approved a sign for the Industrial Park was approved. Chairman Kiritsis asked to see a copy of this letter from the Town. She noted that it was documented to her that the current granite rock was shown to her to be no larger than the original sign. Ms. Brown noted that Mr. Diebolt is not happy with the new sign because it advertises an industrial park and he wants to build residential units. Ms. Brown noted that she will report back when the situation is resolved.
5. Regulation Rewrite
A Regulation Rewrite Meeting has been set for Monday, October 23, 2006 to discuss the Gateway Regulations with Linda Krause.
6. Correspondence
None.
A motion was made by Jane Marsh, seconded by Jane Cable and voted unanimously to add approval of minutes and receipt of Site Plan Application to erect a wall, 123 Boston Post Road, Michel Gosselin, applicant, to the agenda.
7. Special Exception Application to erect a wall, 123 Boston Post Road, Michel Gosselin, applicant.
Ms. Brown described the location of the property and noted that the work has begun. Ms. Marsh suggested that Ms. Brown notify the applicant to bring photographs. The Commission received the application and set the Public Hearing for November, 2006.
8. New or Old Business
Chairman Kiritsis stated that they have received a new open space regulation from Attorney Branse. He noted that the Commission requested that he provide a Regulation for both the current and the proposed regulations. Ms. Brown stated that Attorney Branse has also recommended a few small changes to the current PRCD Regulation.
The Commission set the Public Hearing for the December 11, 2006 Regular Meeting.
9. Miscellaneous/Adjourn
A motion was made by Jane Cable, seconded by John Johnson and voted unanimously to adjourn at 9:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan J. Bartlett
Recording Secretary
| 
