OLD LYME ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING- UNAPPROVED
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
The Old Lyme Zoning Commission held a Regular Meeting on Wednesday, October 13, 2010, at 7:30 p.m. in the Auditorium of Memorial Town Hall. Those present and voting were Tom Risom, Acting Chairman, Jane Marsh, Secretary, Pat Looney, Joan Bozek (Alternate, seated). Also present was Ann Brown, Zoning Enforcement Officer.
Acting Chairman Risom called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. He immediately recessed the Regular Meeting to conduct the Public Hearing. The Regular Meeting reconvened at 8:00 p.m.
1. Special Permit Application to permit demolition and reconstruction of dwelling on property located at 42 Breen Avenue, Nicholas DiCorleto, Jr., applicant.
The Public Hearing for this application has been continued to the November 8, 2010 Regular Meeting.
2. Special Permit Application and Coastal Site Plan Review Application to permit an alternative energy system (Wind turbine) on property located at 52 Brighton Road, Jane Marsh, applicant.
Ms. Marsh recused herself. Mr. Looney stated that there is a Regulation and he is glad to see someone move forward with a technology the entire country should consider. Ms. Bozek stated that she agrees with Mr. Looney and has no other concerns except for the condition proposed regarding control of the system by the neighbor. She noted that she although she appreciates that the two neighbors compromised, the condition does not go with the land, it goes with a particular person. Acting Chairman Risom agreed. He noted that the application has all required approvals from other agencies.
Ms. Bozek stated that the agreement between the two parties should be a separate agreement and she is uncomfortable with making it part of the approval. She indicated that they would be walking down a slippery slope incorporating individual agreements.
Ms. Bozek read the Regulation requirements and the Commission agreed that it meets each one. She suggested that the motion should include mention of the agreement between the neighbors.
A motion was made by Pat Looney, seconded by Joan Bozek and voted unanimously to grant the Special Permit/Coastal Area Management Application for 52 Brighton Road, Old Lyme, CT, as follows:
Whereas, the Zoning Commission has received applications for a Special Permit and Coastal Site Plan approval, for property of Jane Marsh at 52 Brighton Road, with plans entitled “Record Subdivision Plan Land of Sylvia L.E.M.D. Marsh Old Shore Road & Brighton Road Old Lyme, Connecticut dated: August 25, 1998, Scale: 1”=100’; Sheet 1 of 1 revisions: 5/26/99, 7/9/99 Prepared by Angus McDonald/Gary Sharpe & Associates, Inc.”; Sheets S-1 through S-5 with Tower Elevation S-1, foundation details I (S-2), II (S-3), General Notes (S-4), Foundation Notes (S-5),
Whereas, the Zoning Commission has held a duly noticed public hearing on September 13, 2010 which was continued to October 13, 2010, and the commission has had an opportunity to hear testimony both from citizens of Old Lyme and from the applicant; and
Whereas, the proposed activity is permitted by Special Permit under the Old Lyme Zoning Regulations Section 11.13, Alternative Energy Systems, and the Commission finds that the applicant has provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate compliance with the technical provisions in Section 13B of the Regulations with the following conditions required to be added:
1. Any stockpiled material shall be protected with silt fencing or other suitable manner.
2. All disturbed areas shall be top-soiled, seeded and mulched immediately after back-filling the tower foundation.
3. Structural and foundation review is within the purview of the Building Official through the building permit process.
Whereas, the Commission finds that the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the General Standards of the Zoning Regulations, in particular acknowledge that the applicant has worked with the abutting neighbors to assure that noise will not become a nuisance, that the proposed use, and other structure 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, although the Zoning Commission has received comments from the Office of Long Island Sound Programs of the Department of Environmental Protection, after submitting the application materials to them for review, the Commission determines that the application and plans are consistent with the goals and policies of the Coastal Management Act and that potential adverse impacts including noise are minimized and acceptable;
Whereas, the Zoning Commission has deliberated and considered the evidence presented at the hearings 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 for a Special Permit and Coastal Site Plan to permit a wind turbine as per plans submitted at 52 Brighton Road, Old Lyme, CT, with the conditions specified.
Ms. Marsh re-joined the Commission at this time.
3. Letter dated January 13, 2010 from the Old Lyme Country Club to release the $4,575.00 bond posted for Erosion and Sedimentation Control as per the Certificate of Decision dated February 13, 2008.
No action taken.
4. Approval of Minutes
No action taken.
A motion was made by Jane Marsh, seconded by Joan Bozek and voted unanimously to amend the agenda to include receiving and setting a public hearing for Special Permit Application submitted by John and Joanna Camilli for 16 Washington Avenue.
5. Special Permit Application to completely remodel existing 3 bedroom residence and add a new master bedroom and relocate bath at 16 Washington Avenue, John and Joanna Camilli, applicants.
A Motion was made by Jane Marsh, seconded by Joan Bozek and voted unanimously to receive the application and set a Public Hearing for November 8, 2010.
6. Any new or old business
Ms. Bozek stated that just this week she was doing business with someone and had to share her address. She explained that the person whom she gave her address to stated that they were just in Old Lyme the other day and thought it was wonderful to go to Old Lyme and see it as they remembered it. She indicated that the individual could not believe it was so well-preserved. Ms. Bozek stated that the Commission work is not only valuable to the Town, but also to the State. She noted that the individual now lives in Glastonbury. Ms. Bozek stated that it is remarkable that it is recognized in other areas of the State.
Mr. Risom stated that they should also applaud Jane's work on the Plan of Development because that is the controlling document.
7. Correspondence
None.
8. Zoning Enforcement
a. Zoning Enforcement Report
Ms. Brown stated that the Registry has been taking most of her time. She indicated that a letter has gone to the homeowner on Flat Rock.
Ms. Brown stated that she had an irate property owner today, so much so that Ms. Barrows asked the police to be on site. She indicated that in the end that calmed him down. Ms. Brown explained that in the end he will be making the changes that need to be made to his plans. She warned the Commission that they will probably be seeing the same letter that he sent to Mr. Griswold about her.
Ms. Brown indicated that they have sent out approximately 80 letters that are year round determinations. She indicated that they have not sent out any letters of dissent yet. Ms. Brown reported that they have received approximately 1,500 applications.
Ms. Brown stated that she feels that both Sue and Sabine are very consistent with one another in making their determinations.
Jeff Flower, architect, indicated that he was present to discuss the definition of half-story. He noted that he gave a presentation at the last meeting and asked Ms. Brown to read the current definition, which she did.
Mr. Flower explained that he tried to show last month how the interpretation of directly could be different. He indicated that with an existing house, he would agree that directly would mean above what is existing. Mr. Flower explained that the problem comes in when a first floor addition is put on. He indicated that there are many different possibilities. Mr. Flower stated that they should try to keep it more simple by just eliminating the word directly so it would read 50 percent of the floor area below it. Ms. Brown stated that many of the possibilities he presented had pop-ups and the roof had no connection with the floor joists. Mr. Flower agreed. Mr. Looney stated that the connection with the floor joists is part of the Regulation for a reason. Mr. Flower stated that
one could argue that the definition of a floor joist and rafter might be the same.
Mr. Flower stated that a salt-box is a story and a half. Ms. Brown stated that that would meet the Regulation. Mr. Flower stated that he could argue against that. Ms. Brown stated that it becomes difficult for her in some of his examples to determine whether the floor joists connect.
Mr. Looney stated that because most of the lots in the R-10 are small, the Commission did not want full second stories, such as the colonial look. He indicated that the change to the Regulation was the look of these homes from the street. Mr. Flower stated that the Regulation could be changed to require some roof showing in the front.
Mr. Flower questioned how a ranch house, typical of Point 'O Woods, having the gable end facing the street, could put on a second story. He indicated that the Commission is trying to establish a look without writing the Regulation to allow it. Mr. Flower stated that as the beach houses are renovated, most will be done in a reasonable manner. Ms. Marsh stated that many people try to get as much bulk as they can. Mr. Flower disagreed and stated that people close to the beach might do that, but not the homes farther up the street.
Ms. Brown stated that she does not agree that most people try to max-out their allowed bulk. She noted that a lot want more headroom and want it to be more modern; maybe a little larger. Acting Chairman Risom stated that many just want space, especially those with children.
Ms. Marsh stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals is an avenue for people who cannot accomplish a reasonable renovation under the Regulations. Mr. Flower stated that he has had many successes with the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ms. Brown stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals is allowing additions, but within the bulk requirements. Mr. Flower stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals is holding the line very well.
Acting Chairman Risom questioned whether they should change the definition to state half the floor area of the story below. Mr. Flower stated that they could leave in the word directly. He indicated that the easiest way to do it is to have the word directly talking about proximity. Ms. Marsh stated that the Commission could adopt an interpretive memo and just the leave the Regulation as it is. Ms. Brown agreed with Ms. Marsh. Ms. Bozek stated that there is still the issue with the floor joists. Ms. Marsh stated that there can be multiple roofs. Mr. Flower stated that the floor joists could start at at least one set of rafters. Ms. Bozek stated that the confusion with the current definition is the fact that there is more than one roof and it refers to a roof. She
indicated that Mr. Flower has depicted something that is fairly typical within the beach areas and noted that it would not comply because of the two roofs.
Ms. Brown stated that if the limitation were just floor area she could compute it, but alignment of floor joists, etc., makes it hard for her to interpret whether something complies. Mr. Looney stated that the Commission wanted to reduce the size and bulk of homes in the R-10 zones. He indicated that as written, a dormer could not be put on a home. Ms. Brown stated that that was not the Commission's intent. She noted that part of the issue is the fact that ZBA was limiting height of buildings in the beach area, rightly so, and people did not like that they were not allowed a 35' height. She noted that everyone is in agreement that most of the lots in the beach areas cannot handle a 35' tall building. Ms. Marsh agreed and noted that beyond controlling the height, the Commission also
wanted to control the bulk.
Mr. Flower stated that the ZBA also considers the size and bulk of the surrounding homes in the neighborhood. Ms. Marsh stated that the Commission is supposed to phase out nonconformities, not allowing them to enlarge. Ms. Brown noted that the bulk regulations are proportional to lot size so if they comply they should be allowed an addition.
Mr. Looney stated that the roof eave is the issue. He gave a visual explanation. Ms. Bozek stated that the existing beach bungalows, whose look the Commission likes, don't even meet the Regulation.
Mr. Looney suggested that Mr. Flower write a Regulation for the Commission’s consideration.
Ms. Bozek questioned whether this language was Attorney Branse's standard language for half-story definition or if the Commission wrote it. Ms. Brown stated that the definition was supplied by Attorney Branse.
Ms. Brown stated that in the meantime she will evaluate each application as best she can. She suggested changing the Regulation to allow 1.5 stories with second floor area limited to 50% of the floor area below. She noted that in that way it will eliminate confusion with eaves and roofs and floor joists. Mr. Flower stated that the ZBA will understand that the Commission wants to avoid the big boxy house. He also suggested that the second floor must be less than the full depth of the first floor which will force a roof. Mr. Flower stated that they could also say that the plate height of the wall on the street side has to be less. He noted that this would reduce the scale.
Ms. Marsh asked Mr. Flower to draft a Regulation because he understands the Commission's intent.
Mr. Flower stated that removing the word directly and adding that the depth of the second floor must be less than the full depth of the first floor and requiring the plate height on the street side to be less will accomplish what the Commission is after. He indicated that he would write a Regulation, but he has an application that has been languishing for months over this definition.
Ms. Brown pointed out that the Regulations now exclude second floor porch decks because they are counted as floor area.
Ms. Bozek asked Ms. Brown to craft a definition based on this evening's discussion. Mr. Flower stated that there are several applications waiting for an interpretation. He asked them to interpret the roof to meaning the primary roof and below, eliminating the word directly. Mr. Flower noted that these interpretations will not be inconsistent with what they are after.
The Commission agreed that the roof referred to in the definition is the primary roof.
Ms. Brown stated that she is confident with the discussion this evening that she can make a decision on the applications pending. She indicated that she will also draft a definition of half-story for the Commission's consideration.
9. Miscellaneous/Adjourn
The Meeting adjourned at 10:04 p.m. on a motion by Jane Marsh; seconded by Pat Looney and voted unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan J. Bartlett
Recording Secretary
| 
