Seal: Washington, Connecticut; Founded 1779 www.WashingtonCT.org
The Town of Washington, Connecticut

Minutes: Zoning Board of Appeals, 2002		 Home
Search
Web page last updated: December 20, 2002
Disclaimer: While we have attempted to reproduce them accurately, the electronic documents you see here are not the official public documents. Official copies may be obtained on paper from the Town Clerk. Also note that minutes of recent meetings are often not yet approved by the Commission, and are subject to correction.

Jump down to: December 12 • November 21 • October 17 • September 19 • August 15 • July 18 • June 20 • May 15 • April 18

December 12, 2002

 Members Present: Edmund White, Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Heman Averill, Georgia Middlebrook, Bruce Skoog
Guests: Ken Hall, Jonathon DeMichiel, Tom Farmen, Dorota Habib

The Chairman, Edmund White, opened the meeting at 7:30pm.

Mr. White opened the meeting by informing the members that election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman needed to take place before the January meeting. The following motion was made:

MOTION: to elect Edmund White as Chairman and to elect Reese Owens as Vice-Chairman was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.

Mr. White started with Agenda Item (4) to allow time for representatives from Item (3) to arrive.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated Ms. Leab, Mr. Owens, Mr. Sedito, Ms. Roberts and himself.

ZBA-0227, Request of Ken & Pat Hall, 14 Cook Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1. c (front yard setback), to install a pool. Ken Hall, owner of 14 Cook Street and Jonathon DeMichiel, a representative from Gregorio Pools, Spas & Skis, were present. Mr. White read the applicant's letter of request and a letter from neighbor Barbara B. Nye (this letter was brought in by Mr. Hall and added to the file). Mr. DeMichiel began by explaining that a new septic system had recently been installed and that the pool needed to be at least 25' away from the septic system. This would place the pool 35' from the 10' right-of-way on the Cook Street road side. Mr. Hall added that alternate locations were to far from the house and they were concerned with the safety issue of watching the children in the pool. Mr. DeMichiel described the pool as an in ground type which would have fencing and decking. Members asked about locating the pool further to the back of the property, Mr. Hall stated that there was a brook and woods located on that part of the property. Mr. Owens commented that the map presented was lacking in details. Mr. Owens also explained that a variance is granted on the condition of the sight and it is improper to grant a variance on a self-created hardship. The recent installation of the septic system created the front yard set back problem. Mr. Gregorio stated that the septic is located in the only place it could be installed. Mr. White asked about other potential sites where the pool could be located and conform to the Zoning Regulations. Mr. White asked about the area south of the septic. Mr. Hall stated that it would be too costly to extend the ditch for piping that far from the house. Members told Mr. Hall that financial hardship is not a consideration for a variance. Mr. White asked about the location of the pool equipment which also needs to conform to the Zoning Regulations and is considered a structure. Mr. Gregorio and Mr. Hall stated that the equipment would be located to meet set back requirements. Mr. Sedito questioned the location and measuring of the property line. Mr. Gregorio stated that the property line is located 10' from the road and they measured 35' in from the property line. Mr. White felt that the applicant could relocate the pool and be in compliance with Zoning Regulations. Mr. White asked members and the public for further questions and comments.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0227, Request of Ken & Pat Hall, 14 Cook Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1. c (front yard setback), to install a pool, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Ms. Roberts stated that she felt this was a self-created hardship and there was a legitimate location for the pool to be placed that would be conforming. Ms. Roberts also felt the map presented had rough sketches and was not to scale. Mr. Sedito agreed that a better map should have been presented and that there were other options for the location of the pool. Ms. Leab added that there was no real hardship. Mr. Owens had nothing to add. Mr. White felt that there was a way to situate the pool within the regulations.

MOTION: to deny ZBA-0227, Request of Ken & Pat Hall, 14 Cook Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1. c (front yard setback), to install a pool, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING - Continued from November 21, 2002

Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Polly Roberts, himself and Alternate Heman Averill.

ZBA-0226, Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 12.1.3 (building within 200 feet of the Bantam River), to install a shed. Tom Farmen and Dorota Habib were present to represent this application. Mr. White and Mr. Owens have made a visit to the site of the shed. Mr. Farmen stated the reason for locating the shed where it is was that the dry well is located adjacent to the pumps and to keep it away from the children's traffic areas. Mr. White asked about relocating the pump and controls to the basement of the Fitch House. Ms. Habib stated that the basement of the Fitch House has a furnace, utilities and storage and that during the summer when this decision was made, about the shed, the Fitch House was fenced off for safety reasons during construction. Mr. White also asked about locating the shed further from the river in a spot off the manmade pond that would conform without violating any other regulations? Ms. Habib's concern is with safety, the high traffic near campus and the need to locate it away from the kids. Mr. Owens is concerned about protecting the "Greenway" corridor along the river and the problem with this being an after-the-fact application. Are there other viable locations, the contents of the shed could fit into a shed one third of the size. Mr. White agrees that the shed is now used as a pump house/storage shed. Mr. Farmen stated that they will do whatever the board asks of them to remedy this situation. Mr. White stated that the contractors need to know and follow the regulations. Ms. Middlebrook suggested installing a smaller shed and shielding it with shrubs. There was much discussion about other options such as locating it further from the river but closer to the pond, having a smaller shed that was camouflaged with shrubs, adding a shed/lean to off the back of the Fitch House. Mr. White asked Ms. Habib to research these other options and to stake the area for members to do a site visit next week. This public hearing was continued to the January 16th meeting.

MOTION: to continue the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0226, Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 12.1.3 (building within 200 feet of the Bantam River), to install a shed, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Owens, by a 5-0 vote.

MOTION: to accept the minutes of the November 21, 2002 was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.

Other Business:

Mr. White informed members that the Zoning Board of Appeals was served a Summons in reference to ZBA-0221, Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee. Mr. White stated that ZBA has retained Mike Zizka Esq. as council. There was brief discussion on the contents of the complaint.

Ms. Roberts asked members for input on the revised copy of the ZBA application. Mr. Owens asked that the back side of the form be reviewed for legal properness.

MOTION: to adjourn was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote at 8:55pm.

Submitted Subject to approval,

Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary

November 21, 2002

 Members Present: Edmund White, Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Heman Averill, Georgia Middlebrook, Bruce Skoog
Guests: James G. Kelly, Esq., Joseph & Leah Pullaro, Stephen Lazar, James Churchill, Gretchen & Phil Farmer, Tom Farmen, Dorota Habib, residents

The Chairman, Edmund White, opened the meeting at 7:30pm.

Let the record show that Katharine Leab listened to the tape of the October 17, 2002 meeting and public hearings of the Washington Zoning Board of Appeals.

MEETING - Continued from October 17, 2002

Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, himself, and alternates Heman Averill, Bruce Skoog.

ZBA-0221, Request of Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 316 Nettleton Hollow Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1 (minimum yard setback), to construct a porch Mr. Skoog began by stating that a lot of the discussion centered around the architectural integrality of this building and he felt that the addition of the porch would neither improve or harm the building. He also felt there was no proven hardship. Ms. Leab felt there was no proof of hardship and found backward arguments to the fact that the whole house is nonconforming keep it that way or tear it down, which she felt was wrong. In regards to preserving an historic structure upon doing research Ms. Leab found that screen porches did not come into being until the early twentieth century. Ms. Leab also felt that there were other ways of dealing with the potential tree problem. Upon visiting the site Mr. Averill felt that the hardship in the removal of the trees is not as members were lead to believe. Mr. Sedito also visited the site and stated that members had asked the applicant to scale down and or push back the porch so it would not encroach on the set backs as much and the applicants chose not to change the scale of the project. Mr. Sedito is wavering on the issue of the porch being necessary for the continued use of the property as residential? He doesn't' feel that the addition would be any more intrusive than the rest of the house. Mr. White finds no hardship in the need for the porch. He also felt that there were other alternatives.

MOTION: to deny ZBA-0221, Request of Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 316 Nettleton Hollow Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1 (minimum yard setback), to construct a porch, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING - Continued from October 17, 2002

Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Bruce Skoog.

ZBA-0222, Request of Nine Main Street Associates LLC, 9 Main Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 16.5.1 (set back from property line for a sign), to install a sign. There was no one present to represent the applicant. Mr. White asked members if they had a chance to visit the sight and check on other opportunities for signage. Mr. White also stated that the commission took this application very seriously because of the obvious suggestion of the applicant that the large trees would be removed if they did not receive their variance for the sign. Mr. White asked for questions or comments from the public.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0222, Request of Nine Main Street Associates LLC, 9 Main Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 16.5.1 (set back from property line for a sign), to install a sign was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Mr. Sedito visited the sight and felt that the sign they have requested a variance for will be no more visible than the signs already in place. He also felt that if the applicant did not get the variance and removed the trees that the sign would need to meet the set back requirements and the sign would be set back into what is now the parking lot. Mr. Sedito feels that removing the trees and installing a sign would be detrimental to the property. In closing Mr. Sedito stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals has always been strict with sign issues and he hopes the owners will not cut down the trees. Ms. Roberts also visited the sight and felt there was already a lot of signage and the proposed sign would not be any more visible. Ms. Leab agreed with Mr. Sedito and Ms. Roberts. Mr. Skoog approached the property form both sides and feels that more signage is not a necessity.

Mr. White added that the past history of the ZBA has proven tough on the sign issue. He also stated that it would be sad to see the trees cut and felt there was extra pressure put on the commission that clouded the issue.

MOTION: to deny ZBA-0222, Request of Nine Main Street Associates LLC, 9 Main Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 16.5.1 (set back from property line for a sign), to install a sign, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING - Continued from October 17, 2002

Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts and himself.

ZBA-0223, Request of Joseph and Leah Pullaro, 23 Calhoun Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front and rear yard setbacks), 12.1.1 (no building other than a boathouse shall be located within 50 feet of any body of water), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a non conforming building), to construct a two story addition. Joseph and Leah Pullaro and Stephen Lasar were present. Mr. White began by reviewing the history of variances for the Pullaro property at 23 Calhoun Street. A request for a variance was granted in 1989 for additions to remodel a second floor bathroom, add a third floor bathroom and deck (there is still only one bathroom, the work hasn't been completed). A variance was granted in 1994 for an above ground pool which the Pullaros state they have decided not to build. Mr. White made reference to an article asking for church support and an article in the Waterbury Republican, both pertaining to the applicant's request for a variance. Mr. White read into record the article from the Waterbury Republican. (both articles were added to this file) He also stated that he was contacted by a reporter but did not issue comment. In reference to these articles it is obvious that the Pullaros are a great family doing wonderful things for their children, the town needs affordable housing and by the show of people in attendance here now they are supported by people in the community. In speaking for the members of the Zoning Board of Appeals Mr. White assured the public that they share the same feelings toward the Pullaros. Ms. Roberts read a letter dated November 11, 2002 from Stephen Lasar, agent for the Pullaros and Mr. White read a letter dated November 20, 2002 from Atty. Thomas Byrne, a land use attorney for the Town of Washington. (both letters were added to the file) Mr. White stated that we have a lovely family who has adopted children with "special needs" and then we have the zoning regulations that have been adopted by the town. Stephen Lasar stated that the issue of the peculiar characteristics of the property, in that the building cannot be added on to have not been addressed. Ms. Leab interjected that Atty. Byrne's letter doesn't address the issue of "disability" of a full time resident. Discussion continued and Ms. Pullaro explained the physical "disabilities" of two of their adopted children and the limited mobility they experience and will continue to experience through out their lifetime. In requesting a variance the Pullaros are trying to prepare ahead of time for accessibility and mobility of their children. Mr. White asked about needing a future variance for ramps. Ms. Pullaro stated that they won't need a variance because they have found a lift that can be installed within the existing footprint of the building. Mr. Averill commented that the question of disability is the key. Mr. White is concerned, from a fire stand point, with safety and losing the rear exit. Ms. Pullaro has discussed a plan with local fireman. Mr. White also asked about a safe play area for the children. Ms. Pullaro explained that there is a gated garden area and large movable play equipment. At this point Mr. White opened the hearing to public comment. Ivan Park a builder who has worked with Habitat for Humanity for six years explained work that he has done on projects in New Milford and Kent. In working with the various commissions and boards it has been a give and take to meet both the human and geographical needs of applicants. It is his opinion in each case Habitat for Humanity has provided decent housing and has enhanced neighborhoods. Mr. Park feels that in this day and age personal hardship needs to be considered, this is an unusual situation. He urged the board to expand the hardship definition; it would be a loss to Washington to have the Pullaros leave town. Bill Bucklin from Cook Street spoke next. Mr. Bucklin referred to the Canoe Brook as nonexistent in the summer and doesn't form the view for the area. He feels that this is a very exceptional situation. Mr. Bucklin has been a teacher for 28 years and spoke of the security that children crave and he feels that ZBA has the power to give the Pullaro children the security to live in their house. William Fairbairn was present as a citizen of Washington. Mr. Fairbairn feels that ZBA is in a difficult situation and presented a map with highlighted area. Mr. Fairbairn states that 85% of the property cannot be used because of set back requirements and because of the unique land this is a clear case of exceptional hardship. He referenced a case "Chevron" which dealt with the same 85% set back issue and the variance was up held according to Mr. Fairbairn. Pete Tagley was next to speak and stated that he felt all requests for variances have a personal component. Mr. Tagley listened to the special needs of the children and questioned if as the children grow will this property still work? If the Pullaros needs or financial situation changes and they do leave town what will happen to this property and the variances granted to it? Mr. Tagley also questioned if granting this variance would set precedent. Mr. White answered that once a variance is granted it stays with that property and regarding the setting of precedent Mr. White stated that each situation is assessed individually. Ms. Roberts added that variances a specific to each property. Kirsten Peckerman stated that she has lived in town since 1971 and that this property was once "an ugly little house" but has since been transformed. Peter Bowman was next to speak. Mr. Bowman stated that it is his understanding that zoning regulations are intended to improve and protect the town, people should be encouraged to improve their properties and he feels it is the Pullaros who should decide if this property will work for them. Dick Sears from 43 Cook Street understands that the ZBA is up against a legal wall but stated that if there is a way to do this do it now for the Pullaros. Doug Bixby pastor of the Salem Covenant Church in Washington referred to the Pullaros house as "the house of love" and spoke the difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. Mr. Bixby ended by stating that the community is blessed by the Pullaros and supports them. Bill Williams, a neighbor to the Pullaros offered his land and stated that this should be built for the kids. Bob McDonald, a 20 year resident of Washington stated that the Zoning Regulations and Zoning Board of Appeals don't take into fact that since the Pullaros bought the house their needs have changed. Mr. McDonald feels that the legal justification is in the nature of the lot. Susan Swanson states that her children are friends of the Pullaro children and that if the Pullaros are forced to leave town it would affect other families, take away a piece of everybody. Ms. Swanson feels the Pullaros are looking for a way to make a safe living environment for their family. Cindy Collins spoke as an adoptive parent. The Pullaros have been of great support and inspiration to her family. Ms. Collins pleaded to let the children grow up in their hometown and in a safe environment. At this point there being no further comments from the public Mr. White spoke of the pickle the ZBA was in because after hearing all the comments from the public there were still regulations and he saw no legalities for hardship. Referring to Section 17 of the Zoning Regulations Mr. White spoke of proposed rewrites to these regulations for non conforming structures in cases when it is hard to show classic hardship. Mr. Lasar feels that there is a legitimate hardship and that ZBA has the right to vary the regulations in regards to exceptional difficulty and hardship. Mr. Owens interjected that the personal issues need to be set aside and it needs to be determined that all reasonable viable alternatives have been ruled out. Ms. Pullaro answered by stating that they have five bedrooms with seven children and two adults, the fact that they have sought the help of Habitat for Humanity means they have found no other alternatives, Habitat for Humanity was their last hope. They do not want to leave this school system; having the children start out in a new system would be hard on the children. Ms. Leab feels that the matter of "disability" as grounds for a variance constitute a "taking", they are keeping up with a growing family, and she would have no problem granting a variance. Mr. Pullaro stated that the need to uphold one law is violating another law, the law of expulsion, excluding a disabled child from their domicile. Mr. White introduced Hank Martin, Chairman of the Zoning Commission. Mr. Martin started by stating that at present there really is no way to regulate non conforming structures. The standard to apply for a variance is difficult and has to do primarily with the land. To vary these regulations is a very serious decision. Zoning will work to create more flexibility in Section 17 to give the Zoning Board of Appeals the ability to regulate without needing to meet the standard of hardship. These proposed changes should be in effect in the next few months and would be another option for the Pullaros to explore. Mr. Martin added that Zoning is trying to be proactive in identifying problems within the regulations. There was discussion on the varied courses that the Pullaros could take. At this point James Kelly spoke of his thoughts on how the Zoning Commission has changed the regulations a lot and in his opinion made it harder to build in Washington. Mr. Kelly spoke of non conforming properties and the need for the regulations to allow these properties to exist. He also stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals has the absolute power to vary for the sake of public health, welfare and safety and in his opinion ZBA can approve anything. Mr. Kelly added that the ZBA would be sued only if somebody proved that the variance has hurt them and from what he has heard in the meeting room tonight no one would. Mr. White reminded Mr. Kelly as well as the public that they have input at Public Hearings and that all boards' members are elected volunteers. Talk ensued about the Americans with Disabilities Act, which Mr. White had limited dealings with. Mr. Sedito interjected that the addition of the first floor bedroom was required to sustain use as a residence. Ms. Roberts felt that hardship was found in the nature of the lot, there was nowhere else to build and it was in keeping with the harmony of the Zoning Regulations. She stated that it made sense, there was no down side. Mr. White stated that he doesn't disagree, but feels the proposed regulation changes would be a better avenue.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0223, Request of Joseph and Leah Pullaro, 23 Calhoun Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front and rear yard setbacks), 12.1.1 (no building other than a boathouse shall be located within 50 feet of any body of water), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a non conforming building), to construct a two story addition, by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Mr. White questioned if the members were informed and comfortable enough to vote. Mr. Owens is on the fence as to how he is going to vote because of the nature of the situation and how it was created. Mr. White is concerned with the loss of the porch and the safety issue connected with it. He feels the Pullaros have addressed the ramp and play area/garden issues, but feels that the proposed changes to the Zoning Regulations would help in this situation. He asked members if they wanted to vote tonight or take some time and vote at the next meeting. Members were in favor of voting.

MOTION: to approve: ZBA-0223, Request of Joseph and Leah Pullaro, 23 Calhoun Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front and rear yard setbacks), 12.1.1 (no building other than a boathouse shall be located within 50 feet of any body of water), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a non conforming building), to construct a two story addition, by a 4-1 vote.

Ms. Leab, Mr. Owens, Mr. Sedito and Ms. Roberts voted to approve.

Mr. White voted to deny.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, himself and alternate Georgia Middlebrook.

ZBA-0225, Request of Jane-Howard Hammerstein, 27 Scofield Hill Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 12.14.1 (generator/air conditioner unit located 10' from house), to install a generator & ac unit. James Churchill was present to represent the applicant. Mr. White read the applicants letter of request. Mr. Owens asked Mr. Churchill if he was aware that the regulations had been changed to locate units 25' from the house. Mr. Churchill stated that he wanted to place the units 200' from the property line. The house and garage are connected so are considered one building. Mr. White asked why the units could not be located within 25' of the garage. Mr. Churchill informed the members that there were buried tanks in the front and a garden in the rear. Gretchen and Phil Farmer are neighbors of the property and do not want the units located any closer to their property than allowed by the regulations. After minimal discussion the applicant chose to withdraw, he will forward a letter to that effect.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Heman Averill.

ZBA-0226, Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 12.1.3 (building within 200 feet of the Bantam River), to install a shed. Tom Farmen and Dorota Habib were present to represent the applicant. Mr. Farmen began by explaining the location of the septic work done this summer and the irrigation system that became necessary. He described the topography and the construction of the campus. He described the shed as a 7x10x7 floating shed located on crushed stone. Members asked what was in the shed. Ms. Habib stated that the shed houses a pump and control pane. Members were told that Inland/Wetlands have already given approval. Mr. White asked if they had considered any other locations. Mr. Owens would like time to investigate what is located in the shed, could it be smaller?

MOTION: to continue ZBA-0226, Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 12.1.3 (building within 200 feet of the Bantam River), to install a shed, was made by Mr. Averill, seconded by Mr. Owens, by a 5-0 vote.

MOTION: to accept the minutes of the October 17, 2002 meeting as submitted, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.

OTHER BUSINESS

Pamela Osborne, secretary passed out a schedule of meeting dates for 2003 and also circulated email addresses to all members.

Ms. Roberts circulated a revamped copy of the ZBA application; she highlighted the changes she made. She pointed out the information she incorporated on to the back of the form and requested input from members.

Mr. White has submitted the annual report for the Zoning Board of Appeals. He also stated that work continues on both the lot coverage issue and Section 17.

MOTION: to adjourn was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote at 10:15pm.

Submitted subject to approval,

Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary

October 17, 2002

 Members Present: Edmund White, Chairman, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Heman Averill, Georgia Middlebrook, Bruce Skoog
Guests: James G. Kelly, Esq., David Kleinberg, Richard Rosiello, Rich Smith, Paul Graney, Andrew Johnson, Joseph Pullaro, Leah Pullaro, Stephen Lasar, Joel Johnson

Edmund White, Chairman opened the meeting at 7:30pm.

PUBLIC HEARING - Continued from September 19, 2002

Mr. White seated Bradford Sedito, himself and alternates Heman Averill, Georgia Middlebrook, Bruce Skoog.

ZBA-0221, Request of Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 316 Nettleton Hollow Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1 (minimum yard setback), to construct a porch. James G. Kelly, Esq., acting as authorized agent for Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee presented a photo exhibit of the construction site at 316 Nettleton Hollow Road, which showed the house at various different views (copies of the 8 pictures were added to the file). Atty. Kelly also introduced the following people David Kleinberg, Architect, Rich Rossiello of Kent Greenhouse landscapers, Rich Smith, project manager, and Paul Graney of Green Hill Restorations & Preservation Consulting. Atty Kelly gave a description of the photos presented. Mr. White asked Atty. Kelly if there had been any changes to the proposal from the September 19th meeting. Atty. Kelly replied that he was submitting additional information but no new plans. Mr. White asked for clarification on the question of encroachment on a town right-of-way. Atty. Kelly stated that the property line is the stonewall, Rich Smith and Mr. Kelly measured from the center of the highway which put the stonewall is at 21'. Mr. Smith also stated that the last section of fencing, furthest north, needs to be moved back because it is on the town right-of-way. Atty. Kelly read a letter written by Mr. Herrmann, Trustee of the Dune Trust which states that the intended use of the house is as a residence for Scott Rudin and that while remodeling his home he wants to provide natural privacy while preserving the history of the house. Mr. White commented on the difficulty members have when they receive lots of added information the night of the Public Hearing. Atty. Kelly stated that the information did not develop by plan but was a growing snowball of information that was intended to answer questions about of the project. Rich Smith project manager stressed the point of preservation of the street elevation of the finished construction and the desire of keeping the old style house. David Kleinberg presented a three dimensional model of the project house. Mr. Kleinberg started by stating that the historical house appealed to the owner he liked the "look" of a nice old house. The proposed porch would give some rational to the 1960's addition which is the master bedroom, will complete/balance the structure. They opted for the screened in porch as opposed to a solid structure to complete the roof line but not overwhelm the structure. An added advantage is the nice view out onto the property which is not now accessed. Mr. Kleinberg described the terrain in the rear of the property as well as the sunroom/sitting room addition. The 50' set back from the front property line runs along the rear of the 1960's wing. Atty. Kelly reminded members that the proposed porch will be used seasonally with no heating or plumbing. In attempting to prove that the variance is within the harmony and spirit of the overall regulations, Atty. Kelly referred to section, in the regulations on preserving historic structures and introduced Paul Graney, a member of the Historic Commission. Mr. Graney read his (four page) letter dated October 17, 2002. Mr. White clarified that Mr. Graney was not representing the Historic Commission and was in fact a hired consultant. Rich Rosiello, of Kent Greenhouse read his letter dated October 17, 2002. Mr. Rosiello addressed the issue of moving the proposed porch back and its impact on existing trees, view and the natural pathway. Mr. White questioned the reality of a "view to the pond". Mr. Rosiello stated that if the variance is granted trees will be removed/relocated and limbed up to acquire a better view. In closing Mr. Kelly summarized and read from his three page letter reflecting the following opinions: discrepancy as to the street numbers of the property, combination of an adjoining lot, references to "hardship", references to the publication "Connecticut Land Use Regulation 2nd Edition" written by Terry J. Tondro. (additions to the file 8 photos and 4 letters) Atty. Kelly feels that the slope, location and history of the house uniquely applied to this land is making it difficult for the house to evolve, it is entirely within its own set back. They are not changing the use, but continuing a single family use. Atty. Kelly added that the entire south side of an existing barn is being removed and not replaced; this barn is also within the set back area so the addition of the screened porch is not expanding the footprint of the property in the set back, but simply moving it, in his opinion. Mr. White asked for comments from the public. Mr. White summarized the reasons for the location of the proposed addition were aesthetics, to finish a project, desire of property owner to have a private space, the view to the ponds and that the applicant has no desire to reduce or move the proposed porch.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0221, Request of Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 316 Nettleton Hollow Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1 (minimum yard setback), to construct a porch, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Mr. Averill, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Mr. White felt that in an effort to move the agenda along, to digest the added information and to give ZBA members a chance to visit the site a vote would be delayed till the November meeting. Members may contact Rich Smith, project supervisor to visit the site (Pam Osborne, secretary has his phone number).

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternates Heman Averill, Bruce Skoog.

ZBA-0222, Request of Nine Main Street Associates LLC, 9 Main Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 16.5.1 (set back from property line for a sign), to install a sign. Mr. Andrew Johnson was present representing Nine Main Street Associates. Mr. White read the applicants letter of request. Members took time to review sign regulations and establish the opportunities for displaying signs within the regulations. Mr. Johnson stated that the logical location for a sign is where you enter the property on Main Street. Mr. Johnson is proposing to hang a sign from the middle tree of three trees that are between the building and Main Street, which would put the edge of the sign 3' from the property line. People park along the road in front of the property and the sign needs to be high to be visible. They already have a sign on the back of the building. Pineman Sign is in charge of the signs and their size; they are familiar with town regulations. Mr. White stated that the ZBA has been tough with the sign issue in the Route 202 area and it seems that there are opportunities to display signs on the buildings. Mr. White also doesn't like the threat of the removal of the three trees if the variance is not granted. Have other options been explored, is this a last resort? Mr. White encouraged members to do a site visit.

MOTION: to continue the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0222, Request of Nine Main Street Associates LLC, 9 Main Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 16.5.1 (set back from property line for a sign), to install a sign, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Averill, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Bruce Skoog.

ZBA-0223, Request of Joseph and Leah Pullaro, 23 Calhoun Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front and rear yard setbacks), 12.1.1 (no building other than a boathouse shall be located within 50 feet of any body of water), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a non conforming building), to construct a two story addition. Mr. Joseph Pullaro and his architect Stephen Lasar were present. Leah Pullaro arrived mid way through the hearing. Mr. White read the applicants letter of request. Mr. Lasar explained that the addition would be built on the existing deck and house; they will be adding sono tubes. It will be a two-story addition on the back side of the house. No addition on the street side. The addition is 900 square feet, at present the Pullaros home is approximately 1600 square feet. Mr. Lasar had photos of the existing deck. Mr. Lasar stated that they had considered other locations off the north side to keep the addition away from the brook; this would be 1' from the property line. Ms. Pullaro stated that this would cut down the maneuverability for wheelchairs and Ms. Roberts added that it would put a lot more house right on the roadside. Ms. Pullaro explained that the main objective was to accommodate a handicapped child with a bedroom on the first floor and have the child feel comfortable and part of the family. They are planning ahead for handicap accessibility. Mr. White asked about two prior applications to ZBA for this property. Mr. Pullaro stated that the pool will not be built. Mr. White remembered that the other request was for a deck built to contain the children, Mrs. Pullaro stated that they now have a fenced in area for play. The property is just less than one acre. Mr. White asked for comments from the public. Mr. White stated that this is a tough spot right in the center of the Depot and members should do a site visit. Mr. Owens added that he is sure that everyone recognizes the good work the Pullaros are doing but that the hardship issue needs to be addressed and he feels the commission needs reasonable legal basis to issue a variance. Mr. Owens would like to get legal opinion.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0223, Request of Joseph and Leah Pullaro, 23 Calhoun Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front and rear yard setbacks), 12.1.1 (no building other than a boathouse shall be located within 50 feet of any body of water), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a non conforming building), to construct a two story addition, was made and withdrawn by Mr. Sedito.

MOTION: to continue the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0223, Request of Joseph and Leah Pullaro, 23 Calhoun Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front and rear yard setbacks), 12.1.1 (no building other than a boathouse shall be located within 50 feet of any body of water), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a non conforming building), to construct a two story addition, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Owens, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Georgia Middlebrook.

ZBA-0224, Request of Charles Eaton and Jesse Caroll, 284 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 12.1.1 (setback from lake), 17.4.a (increase the non conformity of a non conforming building), to rebuild and enlarge a porch. Mr. Joel Johnson was present to represent the property owners. Mr. White read the letter of request. Mr. Johnson explained that the existing porch and deck are rotting, the existing porch is 9' wide and the existing deck, stairs and landing are 7' wide. The porch is presently 40'long and the deck is 20'long. They want to remove the existing deck, stairs and landing. The proposed porch would be 12'6" from the house with stairs off the front, the face of the porch will be 3 ' closer to the lake, the owners are looking for more usable porch space. Mr. Sedito asked if they had Inland Wetland approval, Mr. Johnson said approval was pending. The roof may have a slight pitch change. The proposed porch and steps will project 1' closer to the lake. Mr. Johnson stated that they are not increasing the lot coverage just reconfiguring it. Members discussed with Mr. Johnson the possibility of moving the steps to the side, accessing the lake from the side door at the patio, or recessing the steps into the porch. Mr. Johnson stated that they are trying to improve the view of the house from the lake. Mr. Johnson also stated that there is an old patio to the side of the house that can be removed. Ms. Roberts is concerned about increasing encroachment to the lake. Mr. White is concerned about increasing the volume towards the lake. Mr. Johnson felt that he was at ZBA because of the addition on the corner of the old deck to fill in the proposed porch. Both Mr. Owens and Mr. White felt this was a misconception. There was clarification and discussion on this idea.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0224, Request of Charles Eaton and Jesse Caroll, 284 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 12.1.1 (setback from lake), 17.4.a (increase the non conformity of a non conforming building), to rebuild and enlarge a porch, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Owens, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Ms. Roberts stated that there is no hardship and although a good case was presented as to why this was a better package as far as coverage is concerned it is not as far as volume goes. Mr. Sedito has mixed opinions, the stairs bother him. Mr. Owens feels the commission is obliged to look for uniqueness and hardship and as nice as the addition would be, there isn't a hardship and it isn't unique so it doesn't justify a variance. Ms. Middlebrook feels there truly is no hardship. Mr. White doesn't see the necessity for the expansion in the building mass.

MOTION: to deny : ZBA-0224, Request of Charles Eaton and Jesse Caroll, 284 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 12.1.1 (setback from lake), 17.4.a (increase the non conformity of a non conforming building), to rebuild and enlarge a porch, by a 5-0 vote.

There was discussion on the definition of hardship.

MOTION: to accept the minutes of the September 19, 2002 meeting as submitted by Mr. Averill, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.

Other Business:

Mr. White and Mr. Owens will do a write up on the meeting of October 10th with Atty. Zizka. They will also circulate their notes from the meeting they had on lot coverage with zoning members

Ms. Roberts continues to work on updating the ZBA application. She is working on a comfortable definition for hardship. Ms. Leab has collected six applications from various towns.

Mr. White reminded members to get their comments on the proposed amendments to Section 14 of the Zoning Regulations to Janet Hill.

MOTION: to adjourn was made by Mr. White, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote at 10:25pm.

Submitted subject to approval,

Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary

September 19, 2002

 Members Present: Edmund White, Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito

Alternates Present: Heman Averill, Georgia Middlebrook, Bruce Skoog

Guests: Tracy Tibbatts, John Long, Kevin Sabia, Reginald W.H. Fairbairn, Esq., Daryl Wright, James G. Kelly Esq.

The Chairman, Edmund White, opened the meeting at 7:30pm.

PUBLIC HEARING - Continued from August 15, 2002

Mr. White seated Ms. Leab, Mr. Sedito, himself and alternate Mr. Skoog.

ZBA-0215, Request of Thomas A. & Tracy A. Tibbatts, 1 Barnes Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.4.a (increase the nonconformity of non-conforming building) and 11.6.1.c (side and front yard setbacks), to add a mudroom. Ms. Tibbatts presented survey map #456 of a boarding property at 35 School Street which shows a right of way on Moody Bridge Road. She stated that they had spoken to people in the Town Hall, Roger Cannavaro, Town of Washington Road Foreman and others, to gather information. There are no town marker points on Barnes Road. Mr. White stated that ZBA was looking for a marker point on the Tibbatts property from which to measure from. Mr. Sedito asked if they had contacted a surveyor. Ms. Tibbatts stated they were trying to avoid the added expense. Mr. Sedito added that it would be a minimal expense to have a surveyor set a couple of pins on the property. Ms. Tibbatts asked what her options were at this point. Mr. White stated that the application could be withdrawn or they could vote on the evidence that has been presented. Ms. Tibbatts withdrew the application. . Mr. White and ZBA members were in agreement that if Mr. & Ms. Tibbatts reapplied before the end of the calendar year the application fee would be waived.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated Ms. Leab, Mr. Sedito, himself and alternates Mr. Averill and Mr. Skoog.

ZBA-0219, Request of John Long, 59 Horse Heaven Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front yard setback), to add a living room. Mr. Long and his builder Kevin Sabia were present. Mr. White read Mr. Long's letter of request. Mr. Sabia explained the survey and proposed additions to the existing house. The additions to the front of the house include an entry way and livingroom. The proposed livingroom will measure 24' x 26'.The livingroom doesn't meet the front yard set back by 4'10". The existing livingroom is a converted one car garage which will be used as an office. The house will remain a one story structure. Mr. White asked the applicant if he had looked at other options, so they would be in compliance. As far as hardship is concerned Mr. White stated that this is an existing dwelling and the applicant is creating the hardship. Mr. Sedito suggested creating a smaller livingroom or adding onto the driveway side of the dwelling and pushing back the front plane of the house to be in compliance with the set back. Mr. Sabia and Mr. Sedito discussed placement of the gable ends, Mr. Sabia is looking for a clean line on the driveway side of the house. Mr. White feels that there are other options/designs the applicant could explore that would keep the building away from the road. The hardship aspect is hard to find, keeping the addition 50' from the front yard set back is an option, and no variance would be required. Mr. White asked for questions or comments from the public. Mr. White stated that the meeting is at the point of being closed and going to a vote or the applicant could withdraw. Mr. Long withdrew his application.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated Ms. Leab, Mr. Sedito, himself and alternates Mr. Averill and Ms. Middlebrook.

ZBA-0220, Request of B.I. Acquisition, LLC, 182 East Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 12.14 (generators & air conditioners) and 11.6.2 (minimum setback), to install generator & (3) air conditioning units. Reginald W.H. Fairbairn, Esq. was present to represent the applicant. He read the letter of request. Mr. Fairbairn went onto explain that the highway department marks the boundary lines between towns. In this case the town line between Washington and Warren was affected by a misplaced marker. The property owned by B.I. Acquisition LLC straddles the town lines. Mr. Fairbairn pointed out the discrepancy of the town lines on the map presented. Permits were taken out in the town of Warren to install a generator and (3) air conditioning units, applications were granted, permits were given and the work was done (Mr. Fairbairn presented these documents). Mr. Fairbairn offered pictures of the work done. The installation was done within the last year. Mr. White asked about regulations in Warren for the placement of generators, Mr. Fairbairn said there were none. With the misplaced monument, steep incline and with using the old map of the property which was mismarked an error was made, the intention was clearly to place the generator and (3) air conditioning units in Warren. The land has been surveyed. Under Washington' current regulations the generator is to close to the town line and not within 10' of the structure principally served. Mr. Sedito inquired about the distance from the town road. Mr. Fairbairn stated that the generator is 54' to the pole on Route 45 and 100' to Lake Waramaug. Mr. Sedito asked how this problem came to their attention. Mr. Fairbairn replied that someone reported it to Janet Hill. Daryl Wright, a representative for Wright Electrical explained that they initially wanted central air conditioning in the Boulders Inn but didn't want the units located near the outside dining, so they moved them to the edge of the property, because Warren has no regulations against this. It was inspected by the Warren building inspector and everything was hooked up by CL&P, SNET and Cablevision in Warren. Then somebody notified Janet Hill and her measurements showed that the work was done 10' inside the Washington town line. Mr. Wright explained that had the error been found during the project they would have moved everything to the Warren property. Mr. Fairbairn stated that nothing was done maliciously. When the units were installed the mountain side was excavated, a plateau and pad were made for the units. It would cost approximately $50,000.00 to relocate the units. Mr. Fairbairn stated that it would be harsh punishment for an obvious error that was not intentional "a good faith error". Members suggested screening the units with shrubbery. Mr. Wright replied that it was the intent to put up shrubbery screening but when the boundary line problem arose they stopped work on the project. Mr. Fairbairn is trying to find a practical solution to the problem. Ms. Leab asked about unhappy neighbors, Mr. Fairbairn has spoken to the closest neighbor Mr. Franklin and he has no problem except he would like to see shrubs planted to screen the units. Mr. Fairbairn added that the installation meets all the set backs for neighboring property. Mr. White asked members if they were comfortable not actually seeing the Warren regulations. Ms. Leab interjected that when she was doing research on generator regulations, Warren had no such regulations. Mr. White asked Mr. Fairbairn if they would be willing to install screening so the units were not visible from the road. Mr. Wright again reassured members that installation of shrubbery was part of the original plan. Mr. White asked for questions or comments from the public. Mr. White asked members if they were comfortable voting on the application as is with the stipulation that a vegetation screen be installed so that the equipment was not visible from the road. All members were comfortable.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0220, request of B.I. Acquisition, LLC, 182 East Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 12.14 ( generators & air conditioners) and 11.6.2 (minimum setback), to install generator & (3) air conditioning units was made by Mr. Averill, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Members discussed prior generator applications and Ms. Leab stated that this was a very special situation. Mr. White stated that if this application had come to ZBA they would have never approved it. The sighting of this project was sloppy, is it up to ZBA to clean it up? Mr. Sedito added that there was no intent to violate. All members were in agreement. Ms. Leab stated that they attempted to comply, all organizations involved agreed upon the wrong line. Mr. Sedito felt that if they chose to relocate the equipment it would create a bigger problem and mess than already exists. Ms. Middlebrook said it was obviously the mistake of the person who sighted the line and sign, a unique situation. Mr. White once again stated that this would not fly under Washington regulations, but Warren has no such regulations. Ms. Leab asked when are you punitive, when people really have made an effort and gone through the process, if it is not discommoding to the neighbors, doing harm to others and can be hidden do you want to be $50,000.00 punitive. Ms. Leab added the project did go through a process, yes there was a mistake made, with everyone involved nobody corrected the mistake, it was all done in good faith but turned out to be wrong, intent counts, process counts and how punitive you want to be when it's not doing harm counts also. Ms. Middlebrook agreed with Ms. Leab and added that it's not a problem if it can be screened with shrubs and it's not causing noise problems. Mr. Averill agrees and feels the penalty would be out of line. Mr. Sedito felt that no malice was intended and literally enforcing regulations in this situation would create more detriment to the landscape. Mr. White is undecided; it troubles him that because somebody else made a mistake ZBA is left to cover somebody else's tracks, ZBA would not have granted a variance for this project, it's a tough situation. Mr. White reread the legal notice.

MOTION: to approve ZBA-0220, request of B.I. Acquisition, LLC, 182 East Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 12.14 (generators & air conditioners) and 11.6.2 (minimum setback), to install generator & (3) air conditioning units, by a vote of 4-1

Ms. Leab, Mr. Sedito, Mr. Averill and Ms. Middlebrook voted to approve.

Mr. White voted to deny.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated Ms. Leab, Mr. Sedito, himself and alternates Mr. Averill and Mr. Skoog.

ZBA-0221, Request of Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 316 Nettleton Hollow Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1 (minimum yard setback), to construct a porch. James G. Kelly, Esq. was present to represent the applicant. Mr. White read the letter of request. Mr. Kelly added the following to the file; a letter by Mr. Kelly dated 9/19/02, a letter from Duane Dill, Senior Architect dated 9/17/02, a memo from Felix Flint of David Kleinberg Design Associates dated 9/19/02, and a revised lot plan. Mr. Kelly gave lot coverage specifications (Mr. Flint's memo); to clarify that there was not a lot coverage issue. Atty. Kelly read the letter from Mr. Dill which gave reasons for the location of the screened in porch. Mr. Kelly and members reviewed the lot plan, the proposed screened in porch is 29'6" from the front lot line (the front lot line being the stonewall). Mr. Kelly read his letter dated 9/19/02, which described the existing house and work being done on it. It also referenced other properties in the neighborhood, this information Mr. Kelly felt would help prove that this variance is within the nature and harmony of the neighborhood. Mr. White asked for proof of hardship. Mr. Kelly referenced case law that states that a house that exists with in a set back in and of itself can create a substantial difficulty or hardship. He also stated that case law will support a ZBA that will not grant a variance because of lack in proof of hardship. Mr. Kelly feels the hardship in this case is the location of the existing structure, the substantial height issue of the property, and it doesn't dilute the effect of the regulations generally. Mr. Kelly referenced the desire of the town to preserve historical structures. Ms. Leab asked about the terrain of the property, Mr. Kelly replied that it is a substantial up slope. Mr. Kelly and members went on to review the proposed plans and look at other options. Ms. Middlebrook described the property as being "right on the road" and hidden behind a stockade fence. Members asked about moving the porch back in line with the house or extend it off the back of the house. Mr. White asked if the applicants had pursued other options. Mr. Kelly emphasized that the porch is off the bedroom and will be a private outdoor space, to be built on pillars and used seasonal with no heat or plumbing. Mr. White asked Mr. Kelly to have the applicant explore other options, to do with location, size and worked on the plan, and provide that information to ZBA. Mr. White states that there is no hardship, it is a luxury. Mr. White asked for questions or comments from the public.

MOTION: to continue the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0221,Request of Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 316 Nettleton Hollow Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1 (minimum yard setback), to construct a porch, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.

MOTION: to accept the minutes of the August 15, 2002 meeting as submitted, was made by Ms. Leab, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.

OTHER BUSINESS

Mr. White reminded members of the meeting with Mike Zizka on October 10th at 6:30pm. The meeting will last for approximately two hours and will cover state and local regulations, how other ZBA commissions act, procedures, discuss "hardship", special exceptions and special permits, and to focus on the core of what a ZBA does and should do, also how other ZBA commissions operate.

Members received copies and discussed the proposed revisions to the Zoning Regulations to go to a Public Hearing on October 28th (Sections 12.14, 17 and 18.1.3) and the draft of revisions to the Zoning Regulations to be addressed at the September 23rd meeting of the Zoning Commission (Sections 14). There was much discussion on these proposed changes to the Zoning Regulations. Mr. White had hopped that with the Planning Commission working on a new Plan of Conservation and Development regulation changes would slow down, it's hard to keep up with the changes although some are over due. Ms. Leab felt that the proposed changes should be accessible on the town's website and that the Zoning Regulations themselves be formatted differently so one does not have to download the entire document to obtain certain sections. Mr. White encouraged members to put their comments in writing and/or attend the meeting/Public Hearing.

Mr. White mentioned that Mr. Owens, Janet Hill, David Owen and himself met to discuss coverage issues. There seem to be many different view points and conflict in definition on figuring lot coverage.

MOTION: to adjourn was made by Mr. Averill, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote at 9:40pm.

Submitted subject to approval,

Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary

August 15, 2002

 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mrs. Leab, Mr. Owens, Mrs. Roberts, Mr. Sedito, Mr. White
ALTERNATE PRESENT: Mr. Skoog
ALTERNATES ABSENT: Mr. Averill, Mrs. Middlebrook
STAFF PRESENT: Mrs. Hill
ALSO PRESENT: Mr. Tibbatts, Mr. Rosa, Mr. Churchill

Mr. White called the Meeting and Hearings to order at 7:32 p.m. and read the legal notice published in Voices on 8/4/02 and 8/11/02. Concerning #ZBA-0218, an application submitted by Mr. Anderson to construct two barns at 97 Judea Cemetary Road, Mr. White read the 8/14/02 letter of withdrawal from Mr. Bennett, authorized agent.

Tibbatts/1 Barnes Road/#ZBA-0215/Add Mudroom to Existing Dwelling/11.6.1.c and 17.4.a/Continued

Mr. White seated Members Leab, Owens, Roberts, Sedito, and White and noted the property owner, Mr. Tibbatts, and engineer, Mr. Rosa, were present.

Mr. White noted the public hearing had been continued to provide the applicant an opportunity to submit the exact dimensions, location of the dwelling, and property line boundaries as requested by the Board at the July meeting. Mr. Tibbatts stated he had not had a survey done, but had brought Mr. Rosa to discuss the application. The sketch map, "Plot Plan," by Mr. Rosa, dated 5/30/02 was reviewed. Mr. Rosa said the site features were consistent with this drawing, the tax map, and the appraiser's description of the property and on that basis he thought the stonewall along Moody Bridge Road was the boundary line and the existing house was 20 feet from the wall. When Mr. White pointed out the Commission did not know for a fact that was the boundary line location, Mr. Rosa responded that even if that was not the line, the proposed addition would not come any closer to the line than the existing house.

A lengthy discussion ensued. Mr. Tibbatts thought he should not have to provide a survey because the Town should have this information on file. The Board maintained that the house was nonconforming so an addition was not "as of right" and that a variance, if granted, had to be quantifiable. Responding to a question by Mrs. Roberts, Mr. Tibbatts said he had not checked the Town Clerk's Office for a road survey or maps of adjoining properties. Mr. Owens questioned whether the Tibbatts property went all the way to the paved portion of Barnes Road as the survey map for the nearby LaMuniere property at 7 Barnes Road showed the property line was set ten feet from the road. In short, the Board asked Mr. Tibbatts to research the location of the property lines as he had been asked to do at the last meeting because it was necessary that the exact location of the house and boundaries and length of the variance required be established. Mr. Sedito suggested a surveyor be hired to set three pins to establish the boundary line rather than prepare a survey of the entire property.

Hardship was discussed. Mrs. Roberts noted the letter accompanying the application stated the proposed location for the addition was the most feasible because the septic system was located to the south, the driveway was on the east, and there was a steep embankment to the west. Also Mr. Rosa noted that if Barnes Road was considered the front yard rather than Moody Bridge Road, the proposed addition would encroach farther into the required setback. Mr. Owens asked why the dimension of the proposed addition could not be decreased by one foot so that a variance would not be required. Mr. Tibbatts noted the location of a two hundred year old oak that he wanted to save and circulated photos of the house.

Mr. Tibbatts submitted a written request for a thirty-five day extension of the time in which to conduct the public hearing.

MOTION: To accept Mr. Tibbat's written request for a 35 day extension in which to conduct the public hearing for Tibbats/1 Barnes Road/ #ZBA-0215/Add a Mudroom to Existing Dwelling. By Mrs. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Sedito, and passed 5-0.

At 8:10 p.m. Mr. White continued the public hearing to Thursday, September 18, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the Land Use Meeting Room.

Hartley-Schlosstein/97 Lower Church Hill Road/#ZBA-0217/ Addition to Existing Dwelling/12.1.1, 11.6.1.c, and 17.4.a

The public hearing commenced at 8:11 p.m. Mr. Churchill, contractor, represented the applicants.

Mr. White reviewed the documents in the file and asked if the notices to adjoining property owners had been mailed out. Mr. Churchill said this had been done twice.

Mr. Churchill read his 8/8/02 letter to the Board in which he explained the least disruptive location for the addition was on the west side of the building due to a pond, utilities, and difficult topography to the south and front yard setback to the north. It was noted the existing dwelling is nonconforming because it does not meet the minimum front yard setback requirement.

Mr. White noted a similar application for a smaller addition had been submitted and denied in 1997. The 1997 minutes were reviewed. He pointed out the Board had thought there were other options then and that he did not think the circumstances had changed for this application. It was noted three variances would be required for the current proposal; 12.1.1 - setback from the pond, 11.6.1.c - front yard setback, and 17.4.a - increase in the nonconformity of a nonconforming building. A survey map from the 1997 file, Prepared for Ralph L. Schlosstein and Jane D. Hartley,by Mr. Alex, dated 9/13/84 was reviewed and the extensive wetlands on the property were noted. Mrs. Roberts informed Mr. Churchill the ZBA does not reconsider variance requests unless significant changes have been made, which was not the case for the current application.

Mrs. Hill noted the Zoning Commission is considering whether to delete Section 12.1.1 of the Zoning Regulations. If this were done there would be more options for the applicant to build without requiring a variance.

Mr. Churchill apologized to the Board and submitted a written request to withdraw the application.

MOTION: To accept the 8/15/02 letter of withdrawal submitted by Mr. Churchill for Hartley- Schlosstein/97 Lower Church Hill Road/ #ZBA-0217/Addition to Existing Dwelling. By Mr. Owens, seconded by Mr. Sedito, and passed 5-0.

Mr. White closed the public hearing.

The above public hearings were recorded on tape. The tape is on file in the Land Use Office, Bryan Memorial Town Hall, Washington Depot, Ct.

Regular Meeting

Consideration of the Minutes

The 7/18/02 Minutes were accepted as corrected. On page 1 in the sixth line from the bottom, should be On page 4 in the second motion, Mr. Sedito's name was spelled incorrectly.

MOTION: To accept the July 18, 2002 Minutes as corrected. By Mr. Owens, seconded by Mrs. Roberts, and passed 5-0.

Discretion of the Chair

Mr. White had attended the July 22nd Zoning Commission meeting and reported on several proposed revisions to the Zoning Regulations that commission is considering.

Mr. White stressed the ZBA does a diligent job and tries to cooperate with the Zoning Commission. He thought of these proposed revisions and the ongoing discussions between the two boards as a continuing step in their evolution. He said Atty. Zizka, a well known land use attorney, would be invited to give a seminar on law and procedures pertaining to ZBA and that after that had been conducted, a joint meeting with the Zoning Commission would be scheduled.

Mr. White asked Mrs. Hill if it would be possible to tape the portions of upcoming Zoning meetings concerning revision of the Regulations so those ZBA Commissioners who are interested can listen to the deliberations. Mrs. Hill agreed to do so. He thought this would help to keep the two commissions in synch.

Application Form

Mrs. Roberts, Mr. White, and Mr. Owens will meet to work on updating the application form. There was a brief discussion regarding whether surveys should be required as part of a complete application as is required in many other towns. Mr. Owens noted that in Sherman, not only is a survey required, but it must show the proposed work. Mrs. Leab questioned whether this would be too expensive for applicants with minimal proposals. Mr. Owens noted the Board has the authority to waive its standards. Mr. White agreed it would increase the cost for the applicant, but said the Board must be consistent.

MOTION: To adjourn the meeting. By Mrs. Roberts.

Mr. White adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m.

FILED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

Respectfully submitted,

Janet M. Hill, ZEO

July 18, 2002

 Members Present: Edmund White, Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts

Alternates Present: Heman Averill, Bruce Skoog

Guests: James J. Bonsignore, Esq., Thomas & Tracy Tibbatts, Charles LaMuniere, Selectman Nick Solley

Edmund White, Chairman opened the meeting at 7:30pm.

The Chairman read a letter of withdrawal for ZBA-0212, Request of BBNH, LLC, 20 New Preston Hill Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 12.5.1 (accessory structure), 11.6.2 (setback from town boundary), to construct garage.

PUBLIC HEARING - Continued from June 20, 2002

Mr. White seated all regular members. (Mr. White listened to the recorded Hearing from June 20, 2002.)

ZBA-0214, Request of Steven J. Kantor and Ilene Lanier, 240 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1.b (rear set back), to construct a garage. James J. Bonsignore, Esq., of Ebersol & McCormick was present to represent the applicants for Charles R. Ebersol, Esq., who was out of town. Atty. Bonsignore admitted that he became aware of the continuation of this Public Hearing just this morning, but feels he is up to speed on the file. He reviewed with members the issue of the rear property line and the two preexisting surveys. The only survey not within the 25' set back requirements is the Farnsworth survey done in 1979 which brings the rear set back to within 8' of the proposed garage. Atty. Bonsignore found out that Mr. Farnsworth has since passed away, his son has taken over the business but Atty. Bonsignore was unable to reach him. Atty. Bonsignore feels the main reason Atty. Ebersol filed this application was if the issue of the rear lot lines cannot be resolved than he assumes there is a chance that Mr. Farnsworth's rear lot line can be a valid lot line, in which case there would be a need for a variance. Mr. White explained that this is not the forum for a multiple lot line discussion to be decided. Mr. White understands the need and desire of the applicants/owners to sell the property, but the Zoning Board of Appeals doesn't have concrete/ complete information to deal with. The file is incomplete and a decision cannot be made on an incomplete file. Mr. White gave Atty. Bonsignore the option of withdrawing or proceeding with a vote, which would be on an incomplete fill. Atty. Bonsignore suggested continuing the Public Hearing until the next meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, which would allow more time to gather information for procedding or withdrawing this application. Atty. Bonsignore has contacted Kurt Smith from the Connecticut Board of Surveyors, who gave him a few suggestions that he would like to follow up on. Mr. White feels that this situation is better addressed to a higher authority. Ms. Roberts described the situation as the applicant applying for a variance on the most constricting property line, the Zoning Board of Appeals doesn't want to grant that knowing that there are two other conflicting property lines that show the property shouldn't carry a variance. There needs to be a firm property line to establish a need for the variance. At this point there was discussion on having a quorum for the August 8th meeting due to vacation schedules. Mr. White gave Atty. Bonsignore the option of withdrawing and reapplying with the fee being waived, because of the time restraints. Mr. Owens addressed the issue of proving hardship. Atty. Bonsignore doesn't feel comfortable withdrawing the application with out seeking input for Atty. Ebersol or the applicants and asked to continue the Public Hearing. Mr. White doesn't feel there is sufficient time to resolve the property line dispute. Mr. White asked for additional questions and comments from the public.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0214, Request of Steven J. Kantor and Ilene Lanier, 240 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1.b (rear set back), to construct a garage, was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Mr. Owens moved to close the hearing because he doesn't foresee a resolution within the continuance period. He doesn't see a resolution that is sufficiently definitive that would make for a comfortable ruling on a line. Mr. Owens also stated that the issue of hardship is in question and needs to be demonstrated. He has seen no evidence of hardship. Mr. Sedito agrees but does assume they can reapply. Ms. Roberts had nothing to add. Ms. Leab added that there needs to be one legal line, which ever one that may be. Mr. White ended by saying it will take some time deciding on the legal line. Mr. Sedito asked if Janet Hill had been approached about a Zoning Permit. Mr. White answered by stating that a Zoning permit couldn't be issued with out a definitive answer on the lot lines either.

MOTION: to deny SBA-0214, Request of Steven J. Kantor and Ilene Lanier, 240 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1.b (rear set back), to construct a garage, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated all regular members.

ZBA-0215, Request of Thomas A. & Tracy A. Tibbatts, 1 Barnes Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.4.a (increase the nonconformity of non-conforming building) and 11.6.1.c (side and front yard setbacks), to add a mudroom. Thomas Tibbatts read his letter of request for a variance. Mr. and Mrs. Tibbatts went on to describe their property location as a triangle shaped piece, the house is located at the top of the point bordering the old Moody Bridge Road, which is now the Greenway walking path, and Barnes Road. The north side is where they want to expand. On the south are their septic fields and basement access, on the east are Moody Bridge Road and their driveway and on the west side is a steep embankment. The addition is a 8x20 mudroom. Mr. Tibbatts states they are 36' from Barnes Road and 24' from Moody Bridge Road. Mr. Owens asked which was the front of the house? Mr. Tibbatts said it is his understanding that driveway access determines the front of a house, which would make it Barnes Road. Siting Zoning Regulation Section 21 - Definitions, Section 21.1.35 for Front Lot Line because of the two bordering streets it is the owners privilege to name the front lot line. So in fact if Barnes Road is determined to be the side lot line the proposed addition would conform to side yard setback. Mr. Sedito stated that if Moody Bridge Road was determined the side lot line the addition could be decreased by 1' and be within the 25' side lot line setback (decrease the addition to 8x19). Mr. White inquired about neighboring properties. Mr. Tibbatts stated that their lot has never been surveyed but that both neighbors properties have been surveyed. .Mr. Owens asked how setback measurements were taken with out a survey being done. Mr. Tibbatts and Mr. Rosa (the engineer who drew the map for the Tibbatts) measured to the road. Mr. Owens stated that the entire issue is with setbacks and is not a lot coverage issue. Mr. White asked if there would be a basement under the addition. Mrs. Tibbatts stated no, there is also no basement under the porch or existing kitchen either. Mr. White asked for questions or comments from the public.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0215, Request of Thomas A. & Tracy A. Tibbatts, 1 Barnes Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.4.a (increase the nonconformity of non-conforming building) and 11.6.1.c (side and front yard setbacks), to add a mudroom, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Sedito. After a brief discussion the motion to close was withdrawn.

Mr. Owens objected to closing the Public Hearing because he is not comfortable with the lot lines. Mr. Tibbatts asked if the property had to be surveyed. Mr. Owens said not necessarily but perhaps Mr. Rosa can provide an explanation of how he determined the lines, how true they are or whether they are to the road. Mr. Owens feels it is in the applicants best interest to continue the Public Hearing to obtain specific location of the lot line and it is not unreasonable to ask Mr. Rosa to verify the lot lines.

MOTION: to continue ZBA-0215, Request of Thomas A. & Tracy A. Tibbatts, 1 Barnes Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.4.a (increase the nonconformity of non-conforming building) and 11.6.1.c (side and front yard setbacks), to add a mudroom, was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated all regular members.

ZBA-0216, Request of Charles & Judith LaMuniere, 7 Barnes Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front yard setback), 12.1.3 (setback to Shepaug River), 17.4.a (making non conforming building more non conforming), to build a gable over an existing dormer. Mr. LaMuniere read his letter of request for a variance and went on to explain the plan. The front of the house is traditional while the back in a more modern style. The proposed gable over an existing dormer will insulate against heat and cold and also make the back side appear more traditional looking. The gable will be installed on the river side and below the roof line. Mr. Owens verified the setbacks. Mr. LaMuniere clarified his intent to have the gable height 5'6". Members reviewed previous Zoning Board of Appeals files on this property. Mr. White asked for comments and questions from the public.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0216, Request of Charles & Judith LaMuniere, 7 Barnes Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front yard setback), 12.1.3 (setback to Shepaug River), 17.4.a (making non conforming building more non conforming), to build a gable over an existing dormer, was made by Ms. Leab, seconded by Mr. Owens, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Ms. Roberts has no problem with granting this variance, it does not increase the footprint. She understands the reasons for it, not sure if the heat/cold is a hardship. Ms. Leab agrees with Ms. Roberts. Mr. Sedito has nothing to add. Mr. Owens added that the proposed addition doesn't expand the use of any kind, is an appropriate repair and given the fact that the building is fully within the front yard setback he would consider it reasonable hardship to grant a variance to make a reasonable repair. Mr. White agrees.

MOTION: to approve ZBA-0216, Request of Charles & Judith LaMuniere, 7 Barnes Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front yard setback), 12.1.3 (setback to Shepaug River), 17.4.a (making non conforming building more non conforming), to build a gable over an existing dormer, by a 5-0 vote.

MOTION: To accept the minutes of June 20, 2002 meeting as submitted, with the following change to "Other Business" second paragraph deleted and to read as follows: Selectman Nick Solley asked members to give some thought about the possibility of a change in the "Green District", the changes would be a lot coverage change. This was discussed at a meeting with the Chairman of the town's commissions. Nick went on to say that the Zoning Board of Appeals and Zoning Commission should discuss and together could write a letter to George Bender, Chairman of the Planning Commission suggesting that they include some consideration that allow lot coverage issues for institutions on the Green. Nick feels that Hank Martin Chairman of the Zoning Commission feels that the amendments should not exclude residents, considering it a zone not a use issue. Ms. Leab asked if there has been a draft made. Mr. Solley said no. There was discussion on what is allowed now and what effects changes would have. Several members indicated that the district approach might not be the best approach. The problems facing institutions (churches and schools) in town differ from those facing residents and commercial properties. Ms. Leab commented that they are apples and oranges and why not treat them as such. Mr. Owens also brought up the subject of defining lot coverage., was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Mr. Sedato, by a 5-0 vote.

OTHER BUSINESS

Mr. White and Mr. Owens had a follow up meeting with Hank Martin, Zoning Board Chairman and David Owen, Zoning Board Vice-Chairman. They discussed differences between Zoning and Zoning Board of Appeals(ZBA). Mr. Martin/the public is not getting a good idea how deeply ZBA deliberates on matters and what is said during the "meeting" after the Public Hearing. He didn't feel there was enough information on the discussion. Mr. Owens told Mr. Martin that ZBA would attempt to be clearer in their meeting and minutes. Mr. White felt Mr. Martin's ultimate request was to have ZBA deal more with the hardship issues. Mr. White checked with Land Use attorneys and it is an ongoing discussion between town Zoning and ZBA boards, a constant challenge of authority. Mr. White reminded members of the Warren application that was distributed, which is a bit more specific. He also portrayed the ZBA as going through a self-analysis. Mr. White feels that Mr. Martin feels that ZBA has chosen to rewrite the regulations to whatever extent they want. He had proposed regulations that cannot be appealed to ZBA but would go to special permit. Mr. Owens added that their proposed regulation gave them the authority to grant special permits, Mr. Owens felt this was appropriate rather than having ZBA search for a hardship for something that makes perfect sense. Zoning granted themselves the authority to vary their own regulations, allow latitude in their own regulations by special permit and at the end the language states that a variance may not be granted. Is this legal? A part of ZBA policy is to allow by special exception, which does not make the applicant show hardship. Mr. White personally feels this is a test case with Zoning and they may add the line to other regulations. He doesn't like the idea of being bookended out of the process. Mr. Owens feels as exhibited by some of Zonings recent activities where they allow themselves latitude they will find themselves sympathetic to the way ZBA has reacted. Mr. White is protective of ZBA powers which are still needed in town regulation and he is hoping for a slow down in changes in the Zoning regulations until after the new Town Plan of Conservation and Development. ZBA and Zoning need to jointly discuss plans. Mr. Owens stated that if regulations existed that gave landowners more latitude Mr. Martin would feel less strongly that ZBA is undermining the regulations. Mr. White feels that the regulations should be kept tight and Zoning should respect the ZBA process. There are issues that need clarification such as the lot coverage issue. Ms. Leab asked if the enforcement issue was discussed. It was not. Mr. White felt there should be a forum between ZBA and Zoning. Ms. Roberts added that a lot of the variances are for issues that are "grandfathered". ZBA has been tough on river properties and Lake Waramaug. There was discussion on the process of changing Zoning regulations and on the special permit process. Mr. White feels that the ZBA needs to comment to the Zoning on its proposals, he feels there is potential for precedent to be set. There was more discussion on the definition of "special exception". Ms. Leab stated that at her Uconn Extension course for ZBA Board members variances should only be granted for hardship and harmonization with the overall Plan of Conservation and Development. In closing Mr. White felt it was important for ZBA members to have a joint meeting with Zoning members and have a ZBA meeting with Atty. Byrne. There needs to be constant positive dialogue between boards and they need to work together. It was decided that the Chairman, Mr. White would draft comment to the Zoning Commission. Mr. Sedito feels that ZBA has done a good job for the people of the Town of Washington. Mr. White agreed and felt that Mr. Martin is not able to see all that ZBA does. Ms. Leab asked about the instances when ZBA finds holes in the Zoning regulations. Both Mr. White and Mr. Owens felt Mr. Martin wanted the ZBA to respond with a draft of the regulation to submit to Zoning, to get a sense for how the ZBA looks at it.

MOTION: to have the Chairman, Mr. White draft comment to the Zoning Commission on behalf of the Zoning Board of Appeals was made by Ms. Leab, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.

Members agreed to change the next scheduled Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to August 15th, 2002 at 7:30pm.

MOTION: To adjourn was made by Mr. White, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.

Adjourned at 9:30pm.

Submitted subject to approval,

Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary

June 20, 2002

 Members Present: Reese Owens, Katherine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts

Alternates Present: Heman Averill, Georgia Middlebrook, Bruce Skoog

Guests: Paul L. Cornell, Jr., Brian Neff, James G. Kelly, Esq., Michael L. Boe, Charles R. Ebersol, Jr., Esq., Selectman Nick Solley

Vice Chairman, Reese Owens opened the meeting at 7:35pm.

PUBLIC HEARING - Continued from May 15, 2002

Mr. Owens seated regular members Katherine Leab, Polly Roberts, himself and alternates Heman Averill and Bruce Skoog.

ZBA-0210, Request of The Melinda Cornell Moran Grantor Trust, 6 Anna Jay Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1.b (setback, interior lot), 11.5.1 (coverage), 17.4.a (increase of nonconformity of non conforming building), for addition of a bathroom. Paul L. Cornell Jr. was present to represent the Morans. Members received a copy of the "Soil Inspection & Percolation Test Results" for the property at 6 Anna Jay Lane, done by Brian E. Neff, P.E.. Mr. Neff was present to explain the test results. He stated that the proposed bathroom addition is located within 75' of the existing well which makes it not usable for the septic system area. Mr. Neff identified the area on the east side of the property where the existing subsurface sewage disposal system is now located for the back up system. Mr. Owens asked if there were any changes to the application. Mr. Cornell stated that there were none, he did state that if members felt that the addition was to much the applicants would be willing to give up the closet space. Ms. Roberts commented that the existing lot coverage is 24%, with the proposed addition it would be 25% and the encroachment to the property line goes from 29' to 19'. Mr Cornell explained that this adjoining property is owned by the Morans, the deeds were merged and the property cannot be separated from the first piece. Mr. Owens inquired about the basement, Mr. Cornell stated that there is a cellar under the house. Mr. Owens asked for additional comments and questions from the public.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0210, Request of The Melinda Cornell Moran Grantor Trust, 6 Anna Jay Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1.b (setback, interior lot), 11.5.1 (coverage), 17.4.a (increase of nonconformity of non conforming building), for addition of a bathroom, was made by Mr. Averill, seconded by Bruce Skoog, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Ms. Leab has visited the site twice and is worried about crowding and the addition being more than the house can hold. Mr. Averill recognizes the density factor but does not feel the application is inappropriate. Ms. Roberts feels that they are asking a lot on a tiny lot, but understands the location and is satisfied that it makes sense. Mr. Skoog understands the need for the second bathroom, he feels that perhaps what is proposed is a bit more than needed, smaller would be better. Mr. Owens reminded members of Mr. Cornell's offer to exclude the closet part of the addition. Mr. Owens reread the legal notice and called for a vote.

MOTION: to approve ZBA-0210, Request of The Melinda Cornell Moran Grantor Trust, 6 Anna Jay Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1.b (setback, interior lot), 11.5.1 (coverage), 17.4.a (increase of nonconformity of non conforming building), for addition of a bathroom only, measuring 10'x14', and excluding the walk in closet, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING - Continued from May 15, 2002

Mr. Owens seated regular members Katherine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Heman Averill.

ZBA-0211, Request of William C. Bausch, 24 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.3 (minimum lot size), for lot line revision. James G. Kelly, Esq. was present to represent Mr. Bausch. Atty. Kelly presented a few copies of a "Residential Density Determination Form". The information on this form was filled out by Brian E. Neff, P.E. Engineer. Atty. Kelly explained the information contained in the forms. Both lots (24 & 32 School) are presently nonconforming. Atty. Kelly stated that in making this lot line revision these lots will be more consistent with the neighborhood. Mr. Kelly needs a zoning permit for this lot line revision. Mr. Owens spoke to Atty. Byrne who's opinion is to deny any condition that will create more of a nonconformity. Mr. Kelly felt that Att. Byrne's comments were toward development, which this application is not. They are attempting to make two lots better. Also Atty. Kelly felt it was inappropriate for Atty. Byrne not to give written information and considers his comments hearsay. Mr. Sedito questioned what the reason was behind the lot line revision. Atty. Kelly's response was that basically the owners of 32 School Street would like more room for a dog fence and Mr. Bausch is willing to make a lot line revision. Mr. Owens asked for additional comments and questions from the public.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0211, Request of William C. Bausch, 24 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.3 (minimum lot size), for lot line revision, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Mr. Sedito is familiar with the property locations and feels that this lot line revision makes sense and doesn't appear to change anything. Ms. Leab feels that there is no hardship but in keeping with the town's Plan of Development this lot line revision makes sense. Mr. Averill agrees with Ms. Leab but feels the reference to the dog fence is inappropriate for the record. Ms. Roberts appreciates the submittal of the density forms and agrees with the proposed lot line revision. Mr. Owens feels that the location of the lot line is more in harmony with the neighboring properties and regrets Atty. Kelly's references to Atty. Byrne's comments as hearsay. Mr. Owens reread the legal notice and called for a vote.

MOTION: to approve ZBA-0211, Request of William C. Bausch, 24 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.3 (minimum lot size), for lot line revision, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. Owens seated Katherine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Georgia Middlebrook.

ZBA-0212, Request of BBNH, LLC, 20 New Preston Hill Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 12.5.1 (accessory structure), 11.6.2 (setback from town boundary), to construct garage. Michael L. Boe, A.I.A. was present to represent BBNH LLC ( Mrs. Joan Rosenberg). Mr. Boe read his letter of request for a variance. Mr. Boe brought larger copies of map #786 with proposed garage site. Existing garage area is gone because of new construction and the barn is full. Mr. Boe stated that during construction (done on the New Milford parcel) nobody realized a problem with the town boundary line running though the property with set back requirements. Mr. Sedito questioned the fact that when obtaining permits in New Milford the town boundary line was never came into question? Mr. Boe stated it was never questioned because they are 378' from adjoining property lines. Ms. Roberts questioned the distance of the proposed garage to the town boundary line. Mr. Boe approximates about 3'. Mr. Owens asked how much relief is needed from the town line and can Mr. Boe demonstrate that relief is needed, he feels this is tough to do without knowing specifically when the town line is. Mr. Boe stated that they wanted to have 50' between the existing buildings and the proposed garage. Mr. Owens stated that Mr. Boe seems to have a sense of where the town boundary line is but don't specifically know, therefore neither do the members, therefore they don't know what they are granting if in fact they do grant a variance. Members requested that a survey be done to determine the town boundary line. Mr. Owens raised the question of the Washington piece of property being a potential lot? Mr. Boe stated that the Washington Parcel is a landlocked parcel with no access or road frontage in Washington. Mr. Owens told Mr. Boe he needs to establish why this garage needs to be built within 30' of the Washington Boundary line, why can it not be built in New Milford without a variance? Mr. Boe stated that they want to keep the utility areas to the back of the house and establish a court yard area. Mr. Boe asked if members do site visits? Mr. Owens stated that yes site visits are done. Mr. Boe asked any members who would like to visit the site contact him to gain access.

MOTION: to continue the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0212, Request of BBNH, LLC, 20 New Preston Hill Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 12.5.1 (accessory structure), 11.6.2 (setback from town boundary), to construct garage, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. Owens seated Katherine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Heman Averill.

ZBA-0213, Request of Peter Bowman and Lesley Neilson-Bowman , 7 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6 (side yard setback), 17.4.a (increase non conformity of nonconforming building), for modifications to an existing garage. Mr. Owens asked Mr. Bowman to read his letter of request for a variance. Mr. Bowman stated that he has done modifications to the roof that differ from his previous application and that the patio is not part of this application. Mr. Bowman wants to install a veneer siding on all four sides (approx. 3' thick) of the garage. He is keeping the walls, changing the volumetric increase is up. Mr. Owens asked for additional comments and questions from the public.

MOTION: to close Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0213, Request of Peter Bowman and Lesley Neilson-Bowman , 7 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6 (side yard setback), 17.4.a (increase non conformity of nonconforming building), for modifications to an existing garage, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Mr. Sedito is in favor of this variance as he was the first time. Ms. Leab feels this looks better. Mr. Averill agrees with Mr. Sedito and Ms. Leab. Ms. Roberts feels the changes will not be noticed at all. Mr. Owens feels this is a tight lot but felt it was reasonable to modify the appearance with the veneer and that the building was not becoming a two-story building. Mr. Owens reread the legal notice and called for a vote

MOTION: to approve ZBA-0213, Request of Peter Bowman and Lesley Neilson-Bowman , 7 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6 (side yard setback), 17.4.a (increase non conformity of nonconforming building), for modifications to an existing garage, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. Owens seated Katherine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Bruce Skoog.

ZBA-0214, Request of Steven J. Kantor and Ilene Lanier, 240 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1.b (rear set back), to construct a garage. Charles R. Ebersol, Jr., was present to represent the application for Steven J. Kantor and Ilene Lanier. Atty. Ebersol read the letter of request for a variance. Atty. Ebersol showed a larger map of the entire property and color photos of the house. He explained that 12' from the front of the house is a steep slope, the house was built (by previous owners) on a level band of land running through the property. Michael Alex the most recent surveyor of the land showed two conflicting boundary lines noted by previous surveyors on this property (Robert Hock in 1986 and John H. Farnsworth in 1979). The proposed garage site would be 8' from the Farnsworth line, 25' from the Hock line and 50' from the Alex line. The proposed garage appears to be within the set back lines from both the Alex and Farnsworth surveys. Ms. Roberts asked if Atty. Ebersol has spoken to Janet Hill Zoning Enforcement Officer about a zoning permit. Atty. Ebersol stated that he has not spoken to Janet yet, he felt that obtaining a variance from the closes property line to the garage would stop future disputes from adjoining property owners. Mr. Owens felt that the conflicting lot line is a legal issue. Mr. Ebersol asked to continue this public hearing so he could speak with Janet Hill in the Zoning Department.

MOTION: to continue ZBA-0214, Request of Steven J. Kantor and Ilene Lanier, 240 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1.b (rear set back), to construct a garage, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.

MOTION: to accept the minutes of the May 15, 2002 meeting as submitted, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.

OTHER BUSINESS

Secretary, Pam Osborne asked members about posting the minutes on the Town of Washington's website. There were mixed feels about posting the minutes before members have received/approved them. It was decided to table this question until next months meeting.

Selectman Nick Solley asked members to give some though about the possibility of creating a "Green District" which would solve some of the issues that arise in the "Green" area at the Historical and Zoning Commission level. Ms. Leab asked if there has been a draft made. Mr. Solley replied that the issue hasn't made it that far yet. There was further discussion that brought up the density issues as far as schools are concerned. Mr. Owens also brought up the subject of defining lot coverage.

Ms. Osborne made available copies of the "Draft of the Final Report of the Housing Committee", members took the copies Ms. Osborne had, if anyone did not receive one and is interested please contact her.

MOTION: to adjourn was made by Ms. Leab, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote at 9:30pm.

Submitted subject to approval,

Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary

May 15, 2002

 Members Present: Edmund White, Katherine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito (arrived at 8:00pm), Polly Roberts

Alternates Present: Heman Averill, Bruce Skoog

Guests: Peter Bowman, Melinda Cornell Moran and Kevin Moran, James G. Kelly Esq.

Mr. White opened the meeting at 7:40pm. Recognizing that Mr. Sedito was absent Mr. White asked the secretary to phone Mr. Sedito ( Mr. Sedito was needed to sit on ZBA-0209). Mr. Sedito stated that he was in route. The Chairman, Edmund White chose to start with Agenda Item (4), members and alternates were in agreement.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated regular members Katherine Leab, Reese Owens, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Heman Averill.

ZBA-0210, Request of The Melinda Cornell Moran Grantor Trust, 6 Anna Jay Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1.b (setback, interior lot), 11.5.1 (coverage), 17.4.a (increase of nonconformity of non conforming building), for addition of a bathroom. Melinda Cornell Moran and Kevin Moran came forward to present the application for this property and also submitted a letter from adjoining property owner Norma Deneault. Mr. White read the letter of authorization, the letter to Zoning Board of Appeals from the applicant and the letter from Ms. Deneault (see file). Ms. Moran explained that the bathroom would connect to the house through an existing window (which would become the entrance to the bathroom) and the entrance to the closet would be through an existing closet in the bedroom. This addition would be on the backside of the house and behind (3) existing trees. Mr. and Ms. Moran stated that they chose this location because of the natural flow of the house and it balances the house with the sunporch on the opposite end of the house. Mr. White asked about a location for a back up septic area. Mr. and Ms. Moran were unsure of this location. Mr. White was concerned about the tight situation and having enough space for a back up septic. The Moran's own an adjoining (second) piece of property with a cottage that can not be separated from the first piece of property, but cannot be used for calculations for this variance because the town lists them as separate pieces. The total increase in lot coverage is 1%. Mr. Owens explained that the Board does not grant variances on the basis of preference when there are viable options and the limit to granting variances when there are alternate issues, cost is not considered a hardship. Mr. Moran explained that they chose this plan because it was unnoticeable from the street, neighbors and their deck. Mr. Owens added that it makes perfect sense but the problem is that it makes the building more nonconforming than the building already is and there is a reasonable option. Mr. White read a letter from Zoning Enforcement Officer, Janet Hill regarding Health Department issues. Mr. Owens added that it would be foolish to grant a variance for a property that the Health Department precluded and testing should be done on the property. Mr. White added that after obtaining the Health Department information the board would have to look at the overall issue of the property being at it's maximum already. Mr. White asked members if they had other questions about this property. Ms. Leab had questions about neighboring properties. Mr. and Ms. Moran explained the locations to Ms. Leab. In closing Mr. White requested that the Health testing be done and located on the maps.

MOTION: to continue the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0210, Request of The Melinda Cornell Moran Grantor Trust, 6 Anna Jay Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1.b (setback, interior lot), 11.5.1 (coverage), 17.4.a (increase of nonconformity of non conforming building), for addition of a bathroom, was made by Mr. Averill, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING - Continued from April 18,2002

Mr. White seated regular members Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate member Bruce Skoog.

ZBA-0209, Request of Peter Bowman, 7 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6 (side yard setback), 17.4.a ( increase non-conformity of nonconforming buildings) and 11.5.1 (lot coverage), for modifications to existing garage and addition of a terrace. Mr. Bowman began with presenting lot coverage figures, the existing coverage is 15.76%, which exceeds the maximum. With the additions of the garage roof and terrace lot coverage would be 17.14%. (An increase of 1.38%) Mr. White inquired about trees on the school side of the garage. Mr. Bowman stated that there was a large tree on the school property and tall weed growth, no trees on his property. The terrace will be brick loose laid in stone (it will service two doors in the rear of the house), the garage remains as submitted at the April meeting. Mr. Bowman stated that the front walk, which is made of asphalt, is never used except to get the mail. All traffic in and out of the house is to the back door and there is a safety (ice) issue in the winter time. Mr. Bowman questioned the boards statement of using impermeable and permeable surfaces in measuring lot coverage. Mr. Bowman is enhancing the appearance of the garage by adding the stone veneer and matching the overhang on the garage. By extending the overhang he is protecting the stone veneer. Mr. Owens stated that the stone veneer is increasing the footprint but is within the overhang so consequently not counted. Mr. White asked for additional comments and questions from the public.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0209, Request of Peter Bowman, 7 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6 (side yard setback), 17.4.a ( increase non-conformity of nonconforming buildings) and 11.5.1 (lot coverage), for modifications to existing garage and addition of a terrace, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Bruce Skoog, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Mr. Sedito has no problem with this application, the lot coverage is a modest increase, he feels the use of the garage is changing but overall he has no problem with it. Ms. Roberts also has no problem with this application, she understands the need for the walkway and terrace, the modifications to the garage are a big improvement. Mr. Skoog had little to add except he thought the terrace could have been smaller. Mr Owens doesn't object to the changing of the shape of the roof on the garage, but feels the walls don't need to project (but he does understand the logic about wanting them too). Given the fact that this building is 4' to the lot line the simple choice is to project them a foot or project them to cover the veneer, his position is to cover the veneer and don't project them a foot, it's unnecessary. He accepts the path and the desire for a terrace, feels it's bigger than it needs to be. Mr. Owens doesn't feel that it would reduce the effectiveness of what's proposed if it were trimmed to it's least non conforming condition. He is not in favor of the variance. Mr. White agrees with Mr. Owens, the proposal is not a lot over and he understands why Mr. Bowman wants to do the garage. He thinks the garage will look great and much larger. The size of the terrace is over stepping, perhaps reducing the front walk to off set the terrace. He is not in favor of the project as presented. Mr. White reread the legal notice and called for a vote.

MOTION: to deny ZBA-0209 Request of Peter Bowman, 7 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6 (side yard setback), 17.4.a ( increase non-conformity of nonconforming buildings) and 11.5.1 (lot coverage), for modifications to existing garage and addition of a terrace by a 3-2 vote.

Mr. Sedito, Ms. Roberts, and Mr. Skoog voted to approve.

Mr. White and Mr. Owens voted to deny.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated regular members Katherine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself.

ZBA-0211 Request of William C. Bausch, 24 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.3 (minimum lot size), for lot line revision. James G. Kelly Esq. was present to represent Mr. Bausch. The Chairman, Mr. White read the authorization and application letter (see file). Mr. Kelly presented a notice sent to Emily A. Dexter of 13 Moody Bridge Road a property owner within 200' of the applicant's land. The property at 13 Moody Bridge had been recently sold and Atty. Kelly hand delivered notice to the new owners (Ms. Dexter).Atty. Kelly explained the existing property lines for 24 and 32 School Street as well as the proposed lot line revision to board members. Atty. Kelly went on to explain his understanding of the procedures for lot line revision. Atty. Kelly was sent to ZBA for a variance by the Zoning Commission. The only known issue Atty. Kelly believes he has is minimum lot size. He asked members to assume that under the soil based zoning regulations both lots are non conforming. He went on to explain that most of the land above both properties is extremely sloped and ledge based, the soil down close to the road he believes to be "B" soils. Atty. Kelly spoke in reference to the Health issues, neither properties is seeking a permit for anything, so it is his belief Health sign off is not needed. Atty. Kelly stated that Mr. Bausch is fully aware of the coverage risks he takes in seeking this lot line revision. Mr. Owens questioned Atty. Kelly as to whether Mr. Bausch's lot is presently a non conforming lot. Atty. Kelly is assuming it is a non conforming lot. Mr. Owens questioned how ZBA or Zoning understand whether a lot is conforming with out a soil analysis. Atty. Kelly voiced his opinion on lot line revision regulations. There was much discussion and concern about making a conforming lot (24 School Street) into a non conforming lot and the definition of minimum lot size. Atty. Kelly came before the ZBA assuming that the lot (24 School Street) is a non conforming lot to avoid the expense of a engineer to calculate the conformity or non conformity of the lot. It was very unclear among members if this is a variance issue. (What are they varying?). Atty. Kelly would assume the board is varying a lot that is non conforming. Mr. White asked if there was any hardship? Atty. Kelly has issue with the definition of hardship and feels that any property that is preexisting/non conforming is a hardship. Atty. Kelly is requesting a variance under 18.1.2 because he was told by Zoning that he is seeking a lot line revision between two lots that do not conform with existing minimum lot size and will not conform after. Mr. Owens is still concerned with creating a non conformity where non exists now.

MOTION: to continue the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0211 Request of William C. Bausch, 24 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.3 (minimum lot size), for lot line revision, was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.

MOTION: to accept the minutes of the April 18, 2002 meeting as submitted, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.

Ms. Roberts distributed a copy of the Town of Warren, Zoning Board of Appeals application to all members. She asked members to look it over and discuss it at a future meeting.

MOTION: to adjourn was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote at 9:30pm.

Submitted subject to approval,

Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary

April 18, 2002

 Members Present: Edmund White, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts

Alternates Present: Georgia Middlebrook, Bruce Skoog

Guests: Franklin H. Nichols, Wayne Malenda, Peter Bowman

Mr White opened the meeting at 7:30pm.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated regular members Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate member Georgia Middlebrook.

ZBA-0207 Request of Jenine Michaud and Paul Steinmetz, 159 Woodbury Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 17.4.a (increase of nonconformity of non-conforming building), to construct dormers. Mr. Nichols came forward to explain the application, the roof will be pushed up on both sides of the peak to create the dormers. The ridge line will not be raised. Mr. Nichols provided members with pictures of the existing property. Mr. Owens added that this is not a lot coverage issue. Mr. Nichols agreed as the foot print of the house is not changing. Mr. White asked for questions or comments from the public.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0207 Request of Jenine Michaud and Paul Steinmetz, 159 Woodbury Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 17.4.a (increase of nonconformity of non-conforming building), to construct dormers, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Owens, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Ms. Middlebrook commented that this addition works well with the slight roof pitch. Mr. Sedito has no problem with this application because there is no increase in footprint or height. Ms. Roberts, Mr. Owens and Mr. White agree with both Ms. Middlebrook and Mr. Sedito. Mr. White reread the legal notice and called for a vote.

MOTION: to approve ZBA-0207 Request of Jenine Michaud and Paul Steinmetz, 159 Woodbury Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 17.4.a (increase of nonconformity of non-conforming building), to construct dormers, by a 5-0 vote.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. Owens excused himself from the Public Hearing and left the room.

Mr. White seated regular members Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternates Georgia Middlebrook and Bruce Skoog.

ZBA-0208 Request of Alan and Judy Larrabure, 123 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.5.1 (lot coverage) and 11.6.1 (side yard setback), to construct garage, addition and move driveway. Mr. White began the Public Hearing by advising Mr. Malenda that pursing a Zoning Board of Appeals member outside the meeting was not the best thing to do, it put Mr. Owens in a difficult position. Mr. Malenda apologized. Mr. Malenda began by stating that this was the third application for a variance submitted by the Larrabures. Mr. Malenda felt the problems with the prior applications for an addition were addressed by moving the addition to the back of the house above an existing structure. The addition doesn't add to the footprint of the existing house, the master bedroom and bathroom are the same as the first floor footprint. Mr. Malenda went on to explain that the Larrabures still want the garage which is now one story, the roof has been removed and is 14' wide. The distance from the garage addition to the property line is 16' 2 7/8". There is a preexisting easement, two residents have use of the driveway. Mr. White read letters from neighbors Robert H. Hackney, Jr. and Ronald K. and Dale Anne Palmgren dated August of 2001. Mr. White asked if members had a problem with the dates on which the letters were written, no one was concerned. Mr. White commented favorably on being able to put the extra living space within the footprint of the existing house. The front porch will remain as it is now. Adding the garage and moving the driveway increases lot coverage by 1%. Mr. White confirmed that there are no new porches, landings and that the facade remains the same on the street side of the house except for the garage. Mr. White asked about the location of the garage. Mr. Malenda answered that the garage needs to face as is because the space in the rear of the property needs to be used for reserve septic system. Mr. Malenda brought pictures of the existing house. Mr. White asked for questions or comments from the public.

MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0208 Request of Alan and Judy Larrabure, 123 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.5.1 (lot coverage) and 11.6.1 (side yard setback), to construct garage, addition and move driveway, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.

MEETING

Mr. Sedito felt that the revised plan was a significant decrease and practical given the sight. Mr. Sedito added that the neighbors were OK with this application and he had no problem with it. Mr. Skoog felt this plan was a tremendous improvement and much better looking. Ms. Middlebrook thought the applicant achieved what they wanted and the plan was esthetically attractive. Ms. Roberts appreciated what has been done to scale down the plan, the garage is a reasonable size and request. Ms. Roberts feels that the limited space is a hardship. Mr. White has a problem with the garage, feels it is a tight spot and also has trouble with hardship issue. Mr. White is OK with the house but concerned with the garage. Mr. White reread the legal notice and called for a vote.

MOTION: to approve ZBA-0208 Request of Alan and Judy Larrabure, 123 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.5.1 (lot coverage) and 11.6.1 (side yard setback), to construct garage, addition and move driveway, by a 4-1 vote.

Mr. Sedito, Ms. Roberts, Ms. Middlebrook and Mr. Skoog voted to approve.

Mr. White voted to deny.

PUBLIC HEARING

Mr. White seated regular members Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate member Bruce Skoog.

ZBA-0209 Request of Peter Bowman, 7 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6 (side yard setback), for modifications to existing garage. Mr. Bowman read his letter of request to ZBA members (see file). Mr. White read a letter from neighbor Stanley and Sandra Jennings.(see file) The Washington Primary School is a neighbor on two sides. This is Mr. Bowman's full time residence and he would like to remove and replace the roof on the garage. Ms. Roberts asked if the footprint of the building was changing? Mr. Bowman said there would be no change to the footprint of the building, Mr. Owens asked about veneer additions to the existing block building. Mr. Bowman stated that he is adding a 2" stone veneer to the existing block building. Mr. Owens inquired about the increase from 24' to 26' dimension upstairs. Mr. Bowman stated that the increase is in overhang, currently the overhang is 6" and he is making it 6" on the front and the back. Mr. Owens added that in increasing the overhang and veneer Mr. Bowman is technically increasing the footprint. Mr. Sedito was concerned with lot coverage, in quick figuring the lot coverage was 4025 square feet and allowable lot coverage was 4125 square feet. Mr. Owens and Mr. White questioned the increase of nonconformity of a nonconforming building. Members asked Mr. Bowman to submit lot coverage figures and felt they should get advise on clarifying the variances sought.

MOTION: to continue the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0209 Request of Peter Bowman, 7 School Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6 (side yard setback), for modifications to existing garage, was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.

MOTION: to accept the minutes of March 21, 2002 meeting as submitted, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Skoog, by a 5-0 vote.

Mr. White and Mr. Owens circulated a draft on the subject of regulations for generators and pool equipment (section 12.14) to be submitted to the Zoning Commission (see file). The draft separated pool filters from other items generators, air conditioners etc.. There was much discussion on these regulations and generators and pool filters in general. The point of the regulation is to be "good" to neighbors. Members felt this was a good draft and should be passed on to the Zoning Commission.

MOTION: to adjourn was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote at 9:02pm.

Submitted subject to approval,

Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary