OLD LYME ZONING COMMISSION
PUBLIC HEARING
Monday, January 11, 2010
The Old Lyme Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing on Monday, January 11, 2010, at 7:30 p.m. in the Auditorium of Memorial Town Hall. Those present and voting were Jane Cable, Chairman, Tom Risom, Vice Chairman, Jane Marsh, Secretary, John Johnson, Patrick Looney, and Ted Kiritsis (alternate). Also present was Ann Brown, Zoning Enforcement Officer.
Chairman Cable called the Public Hearing to order at 7:33 p.m.
1. Special Permit/Coastal Site Plan Review to permit demolition of existing house and construction of a new house (total footprint 4,512 s.f.) in approximately the same location on property located at 31 Smiths Neck Road, Peter A. and Katherine R. Griswold, applicants.
Chairman Cable stated that this Public Hearing was continued from the December Regular Meeting. She noted that Mr. Kiritsis would be seated for Mr. Johnson for this item as Mr. Johnson was not in attendance at the December Meeting and has not listened to the tape. Mr. Johnson stated that if for some reason this application is not decided this evening, he would listen to the tapes and then be able to participate.
Ms. Marsh read the Exhibit List for the record.
Kathy Griswold, applicant, submitted comments from her husband which was marked Exhibit W. She stated that her architect, engineer and attorney are all present this evening to answer questions.
Chairman Cable stated that the Public Hearing was held open to receive further comments from Gateway regarding the height of the dwelling. She noted that those comments have been received. Ms. Griswold stated that she has reviewed Gateway’s comments. She explained that they designed a house that would be appropriate for their particular site, the river setting and the Town. Ms. Griswold stated that in considering the location they tried to minimize any additional excavation and maintain an appropriate setback from the river while maintaining the existing trees and vegetation. She stated that they also felt it was important to maintain their neighbor’s sight lines and views down to the river. Ms. Griswold stated that they are hoping the Commission understands their logic for
choosing the location they have which results in a slightly higher elevation than allowed.
Ms. Griswold noted that the proposed house is 4,500 square feet and the lot size is three acres. Mr. Johnson questioned the footprint of the structure. Mr. Adam Latham, the architect, stated that the footprint is 2,200 to 2,500 square feet. Ms. Griswold stated that there is one corner of the house where the height regulation is exceeded. She explained that the house is angled to the southwest and the small area of the house that exceeds the height is not visible from the river. Ms. Griswold stated that they are essentially using the existing footprint which minimizes disturbance to the site; so they know there will be no blasting or disturbance of areas that have not already been disturbed. She explained that the project is consistent with the mission and objectives of the Gateway
Commission, as stated by Torrance Downes in his correspondence. Ms. Griswold stated that Mr. Downes requested that they buffer the area between the foundation and the river with additional plantings and they have agreed to do this. She stated that all three of her neighbors have written letters in favor of this proposal and one of them is also here this evening.
Mr. Johnson questioned the linear foot of the ridgeline. Mr. Pretti stated that it is approximately 60 feet. Mr. Johnson questioned how much of the ridge is over the 35 foot limit. Mr. Latham stated that it is in the area where the existing grade is lower and is approximately 20 feet of the ridge. Mr. Johnson noted that that would mean a third of the ridge line is over the height requirement.
Mr. Pretti submitted a photograph which shows the existing split level house and the southwest portion where the existing grade is lower. He indicated that they are manipulating a grade that was raised on one side in 1957 when the house was built. Mr. Pretti stated that the final grade will be more in keeping with the site. Mr. Looney noted that without taking grade into consideration the house is 32 feet in height. Jim Ciriscuolo, engineer, pointed out the existing trees on the site plan. Ms. Marsh questioned whether there was a note on the plan that required, as part of the approval, that these trees not be removed. Mr. Griswold stated that there is not. Ms. Griswold stated that there are a few Magnolias that may have to be moved a few feet. She pointed out the particular
tree that Mr. Downes was concerned with and noted that it will be retained. Ms. Marsh stated that she would like to see something made part of the permanent record. Ms. Griswold stated that she would be agreeable to replacing trees with mature trees if something were to happen to them.
Frank Cummiskey, 11 Kinner Avenue, indicated that he is immediately adjacent and probably most affected by the project. He indicated that they spent several hours reviewing the plans and feels it is the best use of the property and increases his property value. He indicated that he fully supports the project. Mr. Cummiskey stated that if the house were to move forward to support the height requirement it would affect his views. He reiterated that he is in full support of the project.
Mr. Latham explained that he believes the original grade was lowered two feet to support the split-level construction. Mr. Risom questioned whether he believes the average height of the structure would be 32 feet if that had not been done in 1957. Mr. Latham stated that he does.
Hearing no further comments, Chairman Cable asked for a motion to close this Public Hearing.
A motion was made by Tom Risom, seconded by Pat Looney and voted unanimously to close the public hearing for 31 Smiths Neck Road.
2. Special Permit Application to obtain a liquor permit for the sale of beer only at 389 Shore Road (Dairy Mart), Sara Khan, applicant.
Chairman Cable stated that this Public Hearing was not opened last month because the applicant did not have the required mailing certifications. Ms. Marsh read the Exhibit List for the record.
Joe Ray was present to represent the applicants. He explained that he retired from the State Liquor Commission in 2009. Mr. Ray stated that the property is located in South Lyme. He indicated that the property previously held a grocery/beer permit through Mrs. Patel which expired in 2008. Mr. Ray stated that because the previous permit expired the Kahn’s had to apply for a new permit. He explained that the store is open seven days a week, 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and if the permit is granted they will operate under all of the requirements of the Town of Old Lyme and the State Liquor Commission. Mr. Ray stated that there will be no increase in traffic as a result of this permit. He asked that the Commission authorize Ms. Brown to sign a Liquor Permit as soon as possible so that
the Kahn’s can have this additional income. He explained that the lease is $1,200.00 a month and it goes up to $1,400.00 in June of 2010. Mr. Ray stated that this store is located directly between two other existing packages stores; one is 1.4 miles down the road in Niantic and the second one is 1.4 miles in the other direction.
Ms. Marsh asked whether there is any acknowledgement that the property owner is aware and in favor of the application. Mr. Ray stated that the property owner did sign something. Ms. Marsh stated that the property owner should sign the application or acknowledge by letter that he is aware of the application.
No one present spoke in favor of or against the application. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Cable asked for a motion to close the Public Hearing.
A motion was made by John Johnson, seconded by Tom Risom and voted unanimously to close the public hearing for 389 Shore Road.
3. Coastal Site Plan Review to permit construction of a new stair and terrace on waterside of home while renovating existing structure on property located at 10 West End Drive, Carlos & Melissa Santos, applicants.
Ms. Marsh read the legal notice as published in the New London Day on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 and Tuesday, January 5, 2010. Ms. Marsh read the Exhibit List for the record.
Jeff Flower, architect, was present to explain the application. He explained that the blue line on the site plan represents the mean high water property line; the yellow line is the difference between the V Zone and the A Zone. He noted that there are two V Zones, one with a nine foot high wave and the other a twelve foot high wave. Mr. Flower noted the end of the V Zones on the site plan. He noted that the FEMA Regulations allow construction when at the appropriate elevation or with breakaway walls. Mr. Flower stated that the pink line on the site plan was added by request of Marcy Balint, and this line depicts Elevation 4, which in this area is the highest tide of the year. He explained that Ms. Balint now says that she does not believe this could be the high tide line based on
photographs. Mr. Flower presented photographs and noted that the seaweed line is in different spots. He noted that in one photograph that he took the seaweed line is higher because he took it right after a storm. Mr. Flower stated that Ms. Balint believes the water goes up under the house. Ms. Brown referred to Ms. Balint’s correspondence which refers to new aerial photographs.
Mr. Flower noted that the flood maps being used today are different than those that will be used a year from now. He indicated that he has used the FEMA maps in gathering his information. Chairman Cable questioned whether Mr. Flower has access to the new maps. Mr. Flower stated that the new maps help his client. He noted that the newer maps lower the flood elevation slightly for this property and it will be conforming. Mr. Flower stated that his client would like to create a stairway access to the beach. He indicated that the Zoning Regulations require that the decking be a foot or less off the ground to be considered a terrace.
Mr. Flower stated that based on Ms. Balint’s comments, he is proposing to put holes in the wall. He noted that the lower walls Ms. Balint refers to will be used for seating and to contain the cement slab. Mr. Flower stated that he will put breaks in the walls. He indicated that the State only has jurisdiction up to the pink line. Mr. Flower stated that the FEMA Regulations address what can be done in a V Zone and an A Zone. He indicated that the plan meets those Regulations. Mr. Johnson questioned the need for the eastern retaining wall. Mr. Flower stated that there is no need other than aesthetics. Mr. Flower stated that the walls will be constructed with poured footings 4.5 feet deep. Ms. Marsh stated that a permanent fixture such as this may create a bulkhead
and cause the loss of sand in front of it. Mr. Flower stated that the owner has to add sand after large storms. Ms. Marsh stated that the beach remains until someone tries to block the water. She noted that she thinks that is what the DEP is concerned with. Mr. Flower stated that his client has the right to protect his property. He indicated that once the plan is filed if the beach erodes they can fill it back to its current location. Ms. Marsh stated that the water has moved 50 to 75 feet landward in her 58 years of living on the water.
Ms. Cable stated that Brian Thompson states that a permit may be required from the OLISP Permitting Section. Mr. Flower indicated that he disagrees with this and noted that the elevation provided by an engineer should be all they need. Mr. Johnson suggested that the Commission walk the property.
Mr. Flower read Ms. Brown’s letter which he received today. He indicated that the structure is located with 50 feet of the water and noted that Ms. Brown believes that the proposal is compliant with Zoning because it is not a building. He indicated that if the Commission does not agree, he would need a variance. Ms. Brown urged the Commission members to read the Section and evaluate it themselves. She indicated that the terrace is a structure, not a building.
Ms. Cable questioned what would happen if the Coastal Site Plan was approved by the Commission and OLISP disagrees with that action. Ms. Brown stated that they would have standing. Ms. Cable stated that they could then appeal the Zoning Commission’s decision. Mr. Looney stated that he would like to walk the property. He indicated that the title of the project lead him to believe it was a temporary structure needed while renovating the home. Mr. Looney indicated that he would have already visited the property had he known it was a permanent structure.
Ms. Brown stated that there are different regulations that apply to this project. She noted that a Special Permit is required under Section 4.3, as long as the Commission considers that an addition to the house is acceptable, this project being the addition. She explained that a separate permit is required for the home renovation. Ms. Brown read Section 4.3. Ms. Cable stated that the Long Island Sound is not a river. Ms. Brown stated that the Regulation also addresses tidal water. She explained that in the rewrite of the Regulations the Commission wanted it to apply to all tidal water and it was not written clearly.
A motion was made by John Johnson, seconded by Pat Looney and voted unanimously to continue the public hearing for the Coastal Site Plan Review of 10 West End Drive to the February 8, 2010 Regular Meeting.
A motion was made by Jane Marsh, seconded by Patrick Looney and voted unanimously to accept an additional Special Permit Application under Section 4.3 for the construction of the terrace and stairway and to set the Public Hearing for the February Regular Meeting.
4. Special Permit/Coastal Site Plan Application to permit the drying and temporary storage of dredging material on property located at 2-4 Bank Road, Robert Asselin, applicant.
Ms. Marsh read the Exhibit List for the record. Joe Wren, Professional Engineer, was present to represent the applicant. He noted that the applicants, along with Rob Schickle, who did the DEP and Army Corps permits, were also present. Mr. Wren stated that he submitted all the green cards to the Zoning Office.
Mr. Wren submitted photographs of the site that he took today. He noted that the site is located on Bank Road, which is off River Road. Mr. Wren stated that the blue line on the site plan represents the steel bulkhead that is in place and also the edge of the water. He noted that the green line is the edge of a small area of tidal wetlands. Mr. Wren indicated that the pink line represents 50 feet from the coastal resources and the yellow line represents 100 feet from the coastal resources. He explained that the application is for a Special Permit for dredging and excavation of material on the site; they have also submitted a Coastal Site Plan Application. Mr. Wren explained that the applicant intends to dredge the boat basin to maintain continued use of the property as a private marina. He stated that the last time it was dredged was in 1997.
Mr. Wren explained that the material will be excavated and stored on the site for a period of time and then removed offsite. He noted that the almost the entire site is located within Flood Zone A8. Mr. Wren explained that there will be a net deficit of material from the site. He indicated that they have received permits from the DEP and Army Corps and copies of the authorizations were submitted with the application. He noted that the DEP requires that any soil removed and relocated to a landfill must meet the pink filter test. Mr. Wren explained that the material has to sit and dry for a period of time. He stated that the excavated material, after it dries for a period of time and meets the DEP’s test, will be taken to the Old Lyme Landfill. Mr. Wren explained that the
authorization requires that the instream work be completed by March 31 or not begun until November 1, and extends through March 31 of 2011. He noted that the Town has agreed to accept the material after it meets the DEP’s test. Mr. Wren stated that he has a call in to the First Selectman to determine if the material could be accepted into the landfill next year because if not, it will definitely be done this spring. He noted that it would be the applicant’s preference to begin the work in November of 2010, but it is critical from a financial standpoint that the excavated material be brought to the Old Lyme landfill as part of the landfill closure project.
Mr. Wren pointed out an area delineated on the site plan that will be excavated down four feet and explained that the excavated material will be stored in this area approximately three feet above grade, for a total of seven feet. He noted that the some of the original material will be used to create the berm surrounding the excavated area and some will be stored on site for backfill. Mr. Wren stated that the site will be restored to its existing condition. He noted that three maple trees are being removed.
Mr. Wren stated that they are authorized to remove 1945 cubic yards of material. He stated that the dredging will take three to four weeks. Mr. Wren stated that the only unknown is how long it will take to dry the material sufficiently to meet the DEP’s test. He noted that it could take as long as three months. Mr. Wren stated that they are estimating two to three truck trips per hour when the material is removed to the landfill. He indicated that if they work 8 hours per day, it would take three or four days to remove all the material from the site. He noted that the hours of operation would be 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Tuesday to Saturday because the landfill is closed on Mondays. Mr. Wren stated that after all the material is removed they estimate three days to restore the
site. He noted that the total operational time will be approximately one month.
Mr. Wren stated that he brought a sample of the test soil that they dried so the Commission members could get an idea of the smell. He noted that it is his opinion that it smells like dirt. Ms. Cable agreed. Mr. Looney questioned whether the material will be turned while it is being dried. Mr. Schickle replied that they will not be as the water should go through it pretty quickly.
Mr. Johnson stated that there should be a tracking pad to keep the dirt off of the road. Mr. Wren noted that the part of the parking area is already crushed stone which should act as a tracking pad.
Mr. Wren stated that they have submitted analytical data on the excavated material. He noted that both the DEP and the Town Landfill Engineer did not have any problem with the material. Mr. Wren stated that Marcy Balint, in her review, requested that the silt fence be extended around the toe of the slope of the berm to prevent silt from going into the water. He explained that the reason he did not include this originally was because the truck traffic will make it difficult to maintain. Mr. Wren noted that he expects the removed material to be sandy rather than erodible.
Ms. Brown stated that she received comments from Tom Metcalf late in the day. Ms. Brown read these comments for the river, as follows: 1) tracking pad should be installed; 2) any material deposited on Bank Road should be swept up each day; 3) there should be a provision for dust control; 4) erosion and sedimentation controls needed between the river and the dewatering area, such as hay bales near the riverbank; 5) estimate of cost of erosion and control structures should be submitted to determine E&S Bond; and 6) consider holding site restoration bond. Mr. Wren stated that he does not believe dusting to be an issue. He indicated that they will submit bonds as required by the Commission.
No one present spoke in favor of or against the application. Ms. Marsh questioned whether the Commission wanted to require a bond. Ms. Brown suggested that the motion of approval contain a condition that estimates be submitted for an E&S Bond.
A motion was made by John Johnson, seconded by Pat Looney and voted unanimously to close the Public Hearing for 2-4 Bank Road.
Chairman Cable adjourned the Public Hearing at 9:28 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan J. Bartlett
Recording Secretary
| 
