The Town of Washington, Connecticut
Minutes: Zoning Board of Appeals, 2003
|
www.WashingtonCT.org The Town of Washington, Connecticut Minutes: Zoning Board of Appeals, 2003 |
|
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 theTown Clerk . Also note that minutes of recent meetings are often not yet approved by the Commission, and are subject to correction.
Jump down to: General information about the Zoning Board of Appeals
December 18 •November 20 •October 16 •September 18 •August 21 •July 24 •June 19 •May 15 •April 17 •March 20 •February 20 •Meetings in 2002
December 18, 2003
Members Present: Edmund White, Bradford Sedito, Randolph Snook, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Todd Catlin, Georgia Middlebrook
Guests: Robert L. Fisher, Jr., Esq., Ralph Corbo, Chuck Farnsworth, Dean & Janet Sarjeant, Robert Winston & John David HunterEdmund White, Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm and read the legal notice for tonight's Public Hearings.
PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED
Mr. White seated Bradford Sedito, Randolph Snook, himself and alternates Todd Catlin and Georgia Middlebrook.
ZBA-0322 Request of Corbo Associates, Inc., 218 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.1.2 (area of soil type), 11.3.2 (Acreage based on soil types), to qualify a lot as a building lot. Robert L. Fisher, Jr., Esq., Ralph Corbo and Chuck Farnsworth, land surveyor were present for this application. Ms. Roberts read a letter dated December 11, 2003 from David and Camille Gillespie into the record. All members also received a copy of this letter. Atty. Fisher felt that the Gillespie letter was a NIMBY (not in my backyard) response. Mr. Corbo stated that the Gillespie's purchased (2) of the original (3) lots in the subdivision and were aware of the remaining building lot. Mr. Corbo went on to state that he has contacted all surrounding property owners Gould at lot #68, FMI at lot #67, and the Gillespie's at lot # 69 & lot # 65 none of which are interested in allowing Mr. Corbo to purchase the needed land to make his lot conforming. Mr. Corbo also reiterated the site plan information he presented at the last meeting and that if he had not had the land surveyed nobody would have known about the acreage error. Mr. Corbo quoting from Section 18.1 of the Zoning Regulations feels this plan is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the zoning regulations, the present owner purchased the lot for estate planning reasons over 25+ years ago that is when this error happened. Mr. Snook asked if Mr. Corbo owned the parcel in question. Mr. Corbo does not; he has an option to buy it. Mr. White interjected that the present owner Ms. Taylor could sell her parcel to adjoining property owners. Atty. Fisher stated that this is not a self-created hardship and feels that granting a variance would not defeat the purpose of the Town's overall Plan of Development, the site plan presented last month shows that the lot can hold the proposed project within the required setbacks. This is not a commercial development. Mr. Farnsworth did a survey for the parcel in March of 2003. Mr. Farnsworth stated that the error occurred over 36 years ago. The land was surveyed in 1967 by Osborne, at that time it was a (9) acre parcel with a 50' right-of-way. In 1979 Mr. Farnsworth's father, who is now deceased prepared the subdivision map. In 1986 a survey was done by a Mr. Hock. In 1997 Michael Alex, land surveyor found the error while surveying lot#68. The north east corner monument is off, which makes lot #69 incorrect also. At this point Mr. Gillespie owns lot #69 which has a right-of-way to it from Wykeham Road which runs beside his other lot #65. At this point Mr. Snook addressed the Gillespie's concern of the proposed house being close to their property line. Mr. Corbo explained the location was chosen because of a ledge problem, the natural topography of the land is the reason for the driveway location. He also needed to fit in the septic. Mr. Corbo stated that he could blast. The house will be a (3) bedroom two story house, Mr. Corbo has a fully engineered site plan. Mr. Farnsworth noted that Mr. Gillespie knew about the approved building lot, it has been a viable building lot since 1979. Atty. Fisher added that there are several lots of smaller size along Tompkins Hill Road and there are lots of much larger size too. Mr. White asked for questions or comments from the public. Mr. Farnsworth restated that the lot was viable in 1979 and is a suitable building lot. Mr. White added that it never had (3) acres, it was recorded incorrectly. Mr. Corbo feels that there was always enough property for (3) 3/acre parcels, everyone did the right thing from the beginning; Mr. Farnsworth continued by doing the right thing, an honest mistake was made. Mr. Sedito asked about the effect on the other parcels deeds. Atty. Fisher stated that when Mr. Corbo purchases the lot he will refile a map, the variance will not affect the other deeds. Mr. Catlin asked if all calculations will be corrected. Mr. Corbo closed by stating that he had Smith land surveyors from Woodbury survey the parcel also and they agreed with Mr. Farnsworth's March 2003 findings. Mr. White asked for further questions/comments from members.
MOTION: to close ZBA-0322 Request of Corbo Associates, Inc., 218 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.1.2 (area of soil type), 11.3.2 (Acreage based on soil types), to qualify a lot as a building lot was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Mr. Snook, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Mr. White reminded members that the hearing has been closed but voting doesn't have to be done tonight. Mr. Sedito stated that the Town/Assessor has been treating this parcel as a building lot. He can see the hardship. Will Ms. Taylor be able to retrieve taxes she has paid for a building lot that now is not? Mr. Sedito feels the Gillespie's should have expected a house to be built on the lot. Mr. White asked if it is the ZBA's job to clean up an administrative mistake? Mr. Snook agrees with Mr. Sedito it's a distinct hardship. Ms. Taylor should be able to sell the lot as a building lot, there's a substantial difference in the cost of a building lot as opposed to forest land. He would vote to approve the variance. Mr. Snook would like Mr. Corbo to move the house to the east to address the Gillespie's issues. Mr. Catlin commended the honesty and work done by Mr. Corbo. Mr. Catlin feels the Gillespie's knew about the building lot, that concern is not a factor. He doesn't feel that ZBA should respond to clerical errors the problem should be solved with the Town and surveyor. He's not in favor of the variance. Ms. Middlebrook agrees with Mr. Snook she can see the hardship. Mr. White stated that this is a tough situation, a mistake was made, and the lot was never a legal building lot. Mr. Sedito feels the intent was for a legal lot, ZBA has addressed similar situations; need to look at the scale of the error. Mr. Roberts feels the hardship is Ms. Taylor's, she has been paying taxes on a building lot, she agrees with Atty. Fisher it is within the ZBA purview. Mr. White feels a vote should be delayed he is having a problem with this being the right venue and would like to seek council. He's uncomfortable with voting tonight. Members agreed to postpone a vote and seek legal council.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Bradford Sedito, Randolph Snook, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Todd Catlin.
ZBA-0325 Request of Dean & Jane R Sarjeant, 28 Tinker Hill Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.5.1.a (lot coverage) and 11.6.1 (setback) for a boathouse. Robert L. Fisher, Jr., Esq. and Dean & Jane Sarjeant were present for this application. Atty. Fisher read the letter of request into record. Mr. Sedito questioned the increase in size from what the permit was for. Mr. Sarjeant stated that he used the existing pad/foundation and the building ended up being off the pad and larger & closer to the road than the permit was for. Mr. Sarjeant referenced photos from the previous application which showed the old and new boat house. The old boat house was much larger, and could legally have been rebuilt. Atty. Fisher interjected that the size was not the problem it was the proximity to West Shore Road. The boathouse is built. Mr. White stated that he has received complaints from lake residents who have been denied in the past. Ms. Roberts added that they had the right to rebuild the original structure. Atty. Fisher stated that a town official made a mistake and the applicant over built, the affected neighbor is happy, the boat house is much less intrusive than what was originally present. Atty. Fisher addressed the issue of the chain of title which describes the property as (1) parcel with a highway running through it, the boat house never appears on the surveys. Members discussed the coverage issue. The structure was built off the original footprint. Mr. Sarjeant states that he added concrete piers; the structure is made of pressure treated wood and would not be easy to move. He built it well and carefully. If asked to move the boathouse he would have to rebuild it. Mr. Sarjeant explained that the boathouse contains boat supplies, is a "storage shed" and has an electrical outlet. It is a 10x12 building 10x16 with the roof overhang. Ms. Sarjeant noted the overhang was addressing a health issue she has. Members asked the applicant to confirm lot coverage figures. Pam Osborne, secretary will mail copies of correspondence between Janet Hill, Zoning Enforcement Officer and Atty. Thomas P. Byrne pertaining to this application.
MOTION: to continue ZBA-0325 Request of Dean & Jane R Sarjeant, 28 Tinker Hill Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.5.1.a (lot coverage) and 11.6.1 (setback) for a boathouse was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. White, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Bradford Sedito, Randolph Snook. Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Georgia Middlebrook.
ZBA-0326 Request of Robert Winston & John David Hunter, 92 Bee Brook Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations, 11.6.1.a (front set back), 11.5.2 (lot coverage), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), to make additions to an existing building. Robert L. Fisher, Jr., Esq., Robert Winston and John David Hunter were present to present this application. Atty. Fisher began by giving a history of the surrounding area dating back to the New Preston Railroad station and the right-of-way for the railroad tracks. He identified locations past and present on a 1915 map for the New York, New Haven, Hartford Railroad Company. He stated that Bee Brook Road is much closer to the property lines on the west side and the applicants are dealing with a large right-of-way from the old railroad company that is now open space on the east side of Bee Brook Road. Atty. Fisher also referenced various locations along Bee Brook Road such as signs and buildings that are built in the right-of-way. He feels that the purpose for the set back is safety reasons and that granting this variance is not violating the purpose of the regulations because of the large area in front of the applicants building. He feels the Winston/Hunter building needs to be seen from the road. Mr. Winston added that this is the "gateway" to Washington; you have to take into consideration the commercial use and the aesthetic aspect of the building. Mr. White read into the record the legal response from Atty. Michael A. Zizka. Mr. White feels that with larger windows and lighting people will see into the store front. Ms. Roberts confirmed that the old railroad property is now state land. There was discussion on the flood plain area. Mr. Hunter stated that if a variance wasn't granted the plan was to have as much glass front for as much exposure as possible. Mr. Catlin added that a "strip mall" store front would not be desirable. Mr. White asked for questions or comments from the public.
MOTION: to close ZBA-0326 Request of Robert Winston & John David Hunter, 92 Bee Brook Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations, 11.6.1.a (front set back), 11.5.2 (lot coverage), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), to make additions to an existing building was made by Mr. Snook, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Mr. Sedito felt there was not much new information and Atty. Zizka's letter gave him the information the board was lacking last month. The granting of this variance would be forever and is not just approved for this particular use. Mr. Snook would like to approve this application it would enhance the appearance of the building, which should become a goal of the community. Ms. Roberts sees hardship in the deep right-of-way held by the state. It is a modest request that would look very attractive and feels it is within the intent of the Zoning Regulations. Mr. White interjected the need to balance the level of hardship; does it affect the use of the building? Ms. Middlebrook agrees with Ms. Roberts this will enhance the building, she would approve the variance. Mr. Catlin also feels there is hardship in the right-of-way, but the situation was known to the applicant before they purchased the property. Mr. White feels that Atty. Zizka addressed the front line issue. He feels that with the right lighting and windows the applicant could attain a similar affect.
MOTION: to deny ZBA-0326 Request of Robert Winston & John David Hunter, 92 Bee Brook Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations, 11.6.1.a (front set back), 11.5.2 (lot coverage), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), to make additions to an existing building, by a 2-3 vote.
Mr. Snook and Ms. Middlebrook voted to approve.
Mr. White, Mr. Sedito and Ms. Roberts voted to deny.
MOTION: to accept the minutes of the November 20,2003 meeting as submitted, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Mr. Catlin, by a 5-0 vote.
Other Business
Members were reminded to read through Atty. Zizka's opinion letter.
Members were given the latest revisions to the Zoning Regulations to insert into their copies. Mr. Snook and Mr. Averill have up to date copies and don't need the revisions.
Members were also given a hand out about the Zoning Commission public hearing on January 26th regarding revisions to Section 17.5.
MOTION: to adjourn was made at 10:10pm by a 5-0 vote.
Submitted subject to approval,
Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary
November 20, 2003
Members Present: Edmund White, Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Randolph Snook
Alternates: Present: Mark Averill, Todd Catlin, Georgia Middlebrook
Guests: Robert L. Fisher, Jr., Esq., Ralph Corbo, Andrew Rowan, Justin Primo, Robert Winston, John David Hunter, Dick Sears First Selectman, Valerie Freidman, Terri McCabeThe Chairman, Mr. White called the meeting to order at 7:30pm and read the legal notice for tonight's Public Hearings.
The Chairman took a moment to congratulate Ms. Leab and Mr. Sedito on their reelection to the Zoning Board of Appeals. He also congratulated and welcomed new members Mr. Snook and Mr. Averill.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, himself and alternates Todd Catlin and Georgia Middlebrook.
ZBA-0316 Continued, Request of Mark D. & Chris Adams Beckett, 23 Loomarwick Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front yard setback), 12.1.1 (wetlands setback), 12.1.2 (septic setback from watercourse), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a non conforming structure), to demolish an existing structure and erect a new four-bedroom house. Robert L. Fisher, Jr., Esq. came forward. Atty. Fisher had been in contact with both Mr. Pratt, the architect and Mr. Beckett the applicant. Atty. Fisher understood that Mr. Pratt was to forward a letter of withdraw, because he is currently working on new plans that will fit within the footprint of the existing house. No such letter had been received by the land use office. On behalf of the Beckett's Atty. Fisher wrote a letter of withdraw.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Randolph Snook, himself and alternate Todd Catlin.
ZBA-0322 Request of Corbo Associates, Inc., 218 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.1.2 (area of soil type), 11.3.2 (Acreage based on soil types), to qualify a lot as a building lot. Robert L. Fisher, Jr., Esq. and Ralph Corbo were present to represent this application. Before discussion on this application began Ms. Leab noted that the section of the Zoning Regulation (11.3.2) seeking a variance was incorrect. After the meeting Pam Osborne, secretary conferred with Janet Hill, Zoning Enforcement Officer, it was decided that the correct Zoning Regulation Section was 11.2.1. Atty. Fisher began by stating that the surveyor made an honest mistake, a (3) lot subdivision was approved and each lot was classified as a building lot. Before Mr. Carbo purchased the lot, at 218 Wykeham Road he had a survey and site work done which found that the lot was under (3) acres. Mr. Corbo is seeking a variance for this parcel in order to build a single family home; he has attempted to purchase land from adjoining property owners to make the lot conforming. Mr. Corbo submitted a map with house, septic, and well location to show that there is room for everything, he states that he is 12/100ths of an acre short of the (3) acres. Mr. White noted that the parcel was never large enough, when approved as part of the subdivision it was too small, this is the mistake to be remedied. Mr. Snook asked if Mr. Corbo spoke with the owner of lot #67, Mr. Corbo sent the property owner a certified mailing. Atty. Fisher noted that this is not a self created hardship. But Mr. White countered the lot has always been 2.85 acres. Mr. Corbo interjected that everyone acted in good faith and Ms. Taylor the current owner has been paying property taxes on a building lot. Atty. Fisher asked Janet Hill, the Zoning Enforcement Officer if the lot could be grandfathered; she stated that she could not issue a zoning permit for a non-conforming lot. Mr. White stated that it would be easy to add land to the parcel; it doesn't look like a hardship. Mr. Corbo said he has not been hurt yet but Ms. Taylor is the one to suffer, she's in a tough spot. Atty. Fisher added what's the harm, all the setbacks are OK. Mr. White asked again about neighbors transferring land. Atty. Fisher feels that they can't afford to give up any land. Mr. Corbo noted that this parcel has been valued as a legal subdivision lot for 20+ years. Mr. Catlin asked if the house would be for Mr. Corbo's personnel use, the answer was no it would not. Mr. Sedito asked about contacting the owner of lot #68, a 4+ acre piece, he also asked which (3) lots were the original subdivision. Mr. Corbo stated they were lot #65, 66 & 69. Atty. Fisher asked to keep the hearing opened so they could pursue lot #68, then they might not need a variance. Mr. White asked for comments from the public and further questions from members.
MOTION: to continue ZBA-0322 Request of Corbo Associates, Inc., 218 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.1.2 (area of soil type), 11.3.2 (Acreage based on soil types), to qualify a lot as a building lot, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Mr. Catlin, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Randolph Snook, himself and alternate Mark Averill.
ZBA-0323 Request of Andrew H. Rowan, 12 East Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.4.a (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), 11.6.1.c (setback), for additions & dormer to existing home. Andrew Rowan was present to represent his application. Ms. Leab read the applicant's letter into record. Mr. Rowan began by correcting the total increase in square footage as being 18 sq. ft. not 10 sq. ft. as stated in his letter. Mr. Rowan wants to frame the flat roof section and join the two foundations. At present the second story is listed as 2/3s of a second story, the proposed dormer will run from the chimney to the soffet and be inset 2'. Mr. Rowan wants to keep the classic lines of the house. Mr. White asked for comments from the public. Mr. Sedito verified that the second floor is used as a bedroom now and will continue the same use; Mr. Rowan added that he would be reducing the home from a (3) bedroom to a (1) bedroom. Mr. Rowan stated that you won't see much from the road because the house sits above grade. Mr. Catlin commented that there was not a lot coverage issue. There was discussion of the proposed special exception applications and it's implications in this application. Mr. Rowan feels that his hardships are found in the need to correct the foundation and accessing usable space. Mr. Sedito feels Mr. Rowan is upgrading an existing bedroom to current building code. Justin Primo commented from the audience that the (2) roofs on the back of the structure were built very poorly and need replacing, the existing foundation extends beyond the house, and without the proposed dormer the upstairs has limited usable space. Mr. Sedito noted that the footprint will not be increased.
MOTION: to close ZBA-0323 Request of Andrew H. Rowan, 12 East Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.4.a (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), 11.6.1.c (setback), for additions & dormer to existing home, was made by Ms. Leab, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.
Mr. Sedito is in favor of this variance because it addresses the building code issue with the upstairs bedroom, is not increasing the footprint and will be a great improvement to an ugly structure. Ms. Leab feels the board has done this before and agrees with the request. Mr. Snook and Mr. Averill are in favor of this variance. Mr. White agrees and feels this is a practical solution to the structural problems.
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0323 Request of Andrew H. Rowan, 12 East Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.4.a (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), 11.6.1.c (setback), for additions & dormer to existing home, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Randolph Snook, himself and alternate Georgia Middlebrook.
ZBA-0324 Request of Robert Winston & John David Hunter, 92 Bee Brook Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.a (front yard setback), 11.5.2 (lot coverage), 17.4.a (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for additions to existing building. Atty. Robert L. Fisher, Jr., was present representing this application. Atty. Fisher stated that the lot size was 1.14 acres according to a map on file with the Town Clerk's office. From Route 47 the State of Connecticut has a taking line that runs to within 19'4" of the front of the building; this taking line runs from 75' to 42' into the property from the highway. This is a commercial building. The applicants want to add (2) French door triangles and a covered walkway to the entrance. Robert Winston owner/applicant came forward to explain that people need to see into his store, be visible from the road. Mr. White suggested large flat windows with lighting would help. Mr. Winston feels the proposed triangle windows will be less expensive and people will not see into the flat windows. There was discussion on the purpose of the large setback/taking line the state has along this section of the highway. Mr. Winston stated that the building would become a lovely entrance to Washington; the covered entranceway will be a handicapped access. Atty. Fisher feels that hardship can be found in the state ownership of land up to 19' from the front of the building, there is 9300-sq. ft. of unusable land between the applicant's property and the state highway. Mr. Winston thinks the building is about 40 years old; they will also be decreasing the mass by removing a second story section from the rear of the building and making the entire roof flat and squaring off the back corner of the building. Mr. White asked for public comment. Mr. Winston feels this property is unique because no other building is set so far back from the road. Mr. White did a site visit and feels that lighting would help. First Selectman Dick Sears commented that this is a gateway to Washington, there are fewer uglier buildings, and we need to be sensitive to the commercial issue. John David Hunter stated that they are making a design statement; the building will be wood stained sided. Valerie Friedman spoke as a resident of Washington asking the Zoning Board of Appeals to work within their guidelines. Atty. Fisher interjected that while looking through the Zoning Regulations front setback is 50' he wants to use the highway as opposed to the taking line and doesn't feel this will damage the Zoning setback. Mr. White asked about getting legal opinion on the interpretation on the state's taking line. Mr. Sedito commented that the coverage increase would be 2%. Mr. Winston went on to explain the changes to the loading dock and the squaring off of the rear part of the building. Teri McCabe, a neighbor feels the proposed changes will add to and greatly enhance a property that has been empty for 20+ years. Mr. Winston commented that the property has been well maintained during that 20+ years. Atty. Fisher stated that they will not be building on the state land and will not intrude on the 50' set back from the highway. Mr. Sedito asked about hardship. Atty. Fisher feels the size of the highway right-of-way (taking line) is a hardship. Mr. White asked if the applicants would request a variance for a modified plan, removing the triangle windows. The board will seek legal opinion on the taking line issue. The applicants and Atty. Fisher agreed.
MOTION: to close ZBA-0324 Request of Robert Winston & John David Hunter, 92 Bee Brook Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.a (front yard setback), 11.5.2 ( lot coverage), 17.4.a (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for additions to existing building, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Mr. Snook, by a 5-0 vote.
Mr. Snook feels this is an interim solution that will allow the applicant to proceed while the board seeks legal opinion. Mr. Sedito struggles to find hardship, the building will be much nicer, the front entry way will he handicapped accessible, and he feels the modified requests are reasonable. Ms. Leab feels the covered walkway is a safety issue as well as being handicapped accessible, they are removing volume by taking away the second story at the rear of the building and she has no problem with the applicants squaring off the building. Ms. Middlebrook is agreeable with the solution and modifications made to the application, the building will look nicer and a covered entranceway is practical. Mr. White agrees with the practicality of the entrance and squaring off of the building.
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0324 Request of Robert Winston & John David Hunter, 92 Bee Brook Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.a (front yard setback), 11.5.2 (lot coverage), 17.4.a (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for additions to existing building, with modifications to the original plans, deleting the (2) "bump out" French doors/triangles extending out from the building, by a 4-1 vote.
Ms. Leab, Mr. Sedito, Mr. Snook and Ms. Middlebrook voted to approve. Mr. White voted to deny.
MOTION: to accept the minutes of the October 16, 2003 meeting as submitted, was made by Ms. Leab, seconded by Mr. Catlin, by a 5-0 vote.
MOTION: to accept the 2004 meeting dates as submitted was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.
Other Business
Election of chairman and vice-chairman were tabled until the December meeting.
Members discussed a memo they received from Barbara Johnson, the Assessor for the Town of Washington. Ms. Johnson's letter voiced concern with the new ZBA application request for property history, this information is often difficult for the applicant to research, and she has had several requests for assistance obtaining this information. This is not a function of the Assessor's office and she doesn't have the time to do it. Mr. White will check with Mike Ziska about the origin/need of this section of the application.
Mr. White shared a letter from James G. Kelly, Esq., recommending Ira W. Bloom Esq. as an individual who could provide excellent council to the land use commissions.
Members were also given the most recent draft of Zoning Regulation Section 17.5.a.
MOTION: to adjourn was made at 9:40pm by a 5-0 vote.
Submitted subject to approval,
Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary
October 16, 2003
Members Present: Edmund White, Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Todd Catlin, Georgia Middlebrook
Guest: Robert L. Fisher Jr., Esq., Mark Beckett, Reese Owens, Frank DolenMr. White called the meeting to order at 7:30pm and read the legal notice for tonight's Public Hearings.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Georgia Middlebrook.
ZBA-0316, Request of Mark D. & Chris Adams Beckett, 23 Loomarwick Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front yard setback), 12.1.1 (wetlands setback), 12.1.2 (septic setback from watercourse), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a non conforming structure), to demolish an existing structure and erect a new four-bedroom house. New correspondence received into record were a letter & computer photos dated October 3, 2003 from Roger Pratt, letter dated October 14, 2003 from Keara A. Bergin and Kevin J. Hayden, square footage calculations (3pages) dated October 16, 2003 from Brad Sedito and letter dated October 16, 2003 from Richard C. Kleinberg. Atty. Fisher began by making note that the legal notice for the Public Hearing is for a (4) bedroom house which has been downsized to a (3) bedroom house; he then went on to introduce Mark Beckett. Mr. Beckett told ZBA members that his family is a 5th generation of lake residents and feels they have been good stewards of the lake. He stated that their original residence was 11 Loomarwick/ 67 West Shore Road but that house was not a good "fit" for their family. The Beckett's sold this house to Bergin/Hayden, at the time they were selling they informed the Bergin/Hayden's that they would be rebuilding at 23 Loomarwick Road. At this point Mr. White read into record the letter dated October 14, 2003 from Ms. Bergin and Mr. Hayden. Mr. Beckett continued by saying that the Bergin/Hayden's would be the most affected land owners, of the proposed application and he has been in contact with them every step of the way. Mr. Beckett went on to state that the current plans are less ambitious than originally intended. After feedback from the neighbors and ZBA the project has been downsized considerably. He feels the plan before ZBA is appropriate. The proposed house is the same square footage as what is there now, it is not visible from the lake road and you can see over the house from Tinker Hill. Mr. Beckett submitted several photos taken this day of the property and went on to state that the structure that exists now is uninhabitable. He does not feel the proposed house will impact the property greatly, but will improve the wetlands setback and the septic. Mr. Beckett noted that he has seen improvements to properties right on the lake that have a larger impact than what he is proposing, he feels he has addressed the neighbors and boards concerns and also feels that the proposed house will be an improvement and contribution to the area. Atty. Fisher showed a picture and referenced the improvement of a house at 236 West Shore Road. Mr. White reminded Atty. Fisher that there would be an increase in both footprint and volume of the proposed structure. Atty. Fisher countered by stating that the proposed structure is smaller than the existing house and shed combined. At this point Mr. White presented Brad Sedito's square footage calculations which find the existing house smaller than presented to ZBA. Mr. Sedito was troubled by the calculations and footprint for the existing dwelling presented by Mr. Pratt at the prior meeting, Mr. Sedito and Mr. White visited the property and took measurements. Mr. White went on to say that the proposed house is much larger/taller than what exists, ZBA is being asked to aggregate coverage (existing house and shed = proposed house), the topography of the lot is tough with the wetlands. Atty. Fisher stated that without asking to vary the setbacks (wetlands, front and septic) the property could not be built on, the plan before the board is much smaller than the original, a much more sensibly sized house, the applicant has responded to concerns of the house not melting into the hillside, the site is not out in the open and he is asking the board to find hardship in the setback lines. Atty. Fisher feels this is a modest house designed to work with the landscape and is less obtrusive than many houses along the lake. Mr. Beckett said it's his view that you want people to make improvements to property and there is a need to balance the needs of the community with useful improvements without prejudice to people with limited means. Mr. Beckett stated that they chose to sell their other house to make improvements to the present lot. The lot is wet, they are moving the house further away from the wetlands, and there may be further adjustments to the design due to the measurement discrepancies. Mr. White commented that the board needs to look at other options, try to balance the protection of the regulations and the hardship burden; a house could be rebuilt on the same footprint without added volume. Mr. White went on to state that what is proposed looks ominous, the lot is wet, small and hilly, if you want a larger house you could move to another spot. Ms. Roberts added that ZBA needs to look at how the improvements affect the land as opposed to the needs of the family. Mr. Beckett feels this will be a temporary disruption and in the long term not harmful. Ms. Roberts read into record a letter dated October 16, 2003 from Richard C. Kleinberg. Mr. Beckett stated that he intends to have an environmental engineer look at the property; he will address the runoff issue and the discrepancies in square footage. Members asked Mr. Beckett if he would rebuild on the site if he was denied the variances and live within the existing footprint. Mr. Beckett stated that his family is committed to the property and the lake. Mr. White asked for questions or comments from the public. Atty. Fisher stated at last months meeting he would be agreeable to two continuances; this Public Hearing was continued to the November 20th meeting.
ZBA-0320 Request of Valerie Curtin, 240 Baldwin Hill Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (setback), to construct a (2) car garage. This application was withdrawn by a letter dated October 16, 2003 from authorized agent John Quist.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Todd Catlin.
ZBA-0321 Request of Washington Club Inc., 8 Golf Course Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.5 (increasing the non conformity of a non conforming structure), to enlarge men's bathroom, extend covered porch and relocate bulletin board structure. Reese Owens, architect was present as authorized agent to represent this application. Mr. Owens read his letter of request into the record and noted that Frank Dolen the contractor for the job was present. Mr. Owens used maps and photos to explain the proposed changes; he did note the site consists of approximately 130 acres. Mr. White felt the changes were practical, safer and addressed sanitary issues. Mr. White asked for comments or questions from the public.
MOTION: to close ZBA-0321,Request of Washington Club Inc., 8 Golf Course Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.5 (increasing the non conformity of a non conforming structure), to enlarge men's bathroom, extend covered porch and relocate bulletin board structure, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Mr. Catlin felt the presentation was great and he has no problem with the application. Ms. Leab agreed. Mr. Sedito felt that they were modest requests, the application was well presented and the requests meet safety concerns. Ms. Roberts and Mr. White had nothing to add.
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0321,Request of Washington Club Inc., 8 Golf Course Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.5 (increasing the non conformity of a non conforming structure), to enlarge men's bathroom, extend covered porch and relocate bulletin board structure, by a 5-0 vote.
MOTION: to accept the minutes of the September 18, 2003 was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Mr. White, by a 5-0 vote.
Other Business
Members discussed correspondence for the Sarjeant boathouse at 34 West Shore Road, the Rising residence at 191 West Shore Road and Feldman/Frater boathouse at 123 West Shore Road.
MOTION: to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr. White at 9:05pm.
Submitted subject to approval,
Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary
September 18, 2003
Members Present: Edmund White, Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Todd Catlin, Georgia Middlebrook
Guests: Robert L. Fisher, Jr., Esq., Richard Kleinberg, Roger Pratt, Dirk Sabin, Paul Frank, Valerie Friedman, Lynn Baldwin, Dinah Daly, Bob Nichols, Frank Dolen, publicEdmund White, Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30pm and read the legal notice for tonight's Public Hearings.
PUBLIC HAERING - CONTINUED
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Georgia Middlebrook.
ZBA-0316, Request of Mark D. & Chris Adams Beckett, 23 Loomarwick Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front yard setback), 12.1.1 (wetlands setback), 12.1.2 (septic setback from watercourse), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a non conforming structure), to demolish an existing structure and erect a new four-bedroom house. It was noted that all green cards from adjoining property owners have been received. Mr. White read two letters from Roger Pratt, architect into the record, revised site plans were also submitted. Robert L. Fisher, Jr., Esq. was present to represent the Becketts; he presented a letter of authorization and had submitted a letter dated September 17th. Atty. Fisher began by stating that the Becketts goal was to build the nicest house on this piece of land and didn't consider what the size of the house would look like in the eyes of the neighbors. After the reactions from neighbors at last months hearing the Becketts downsized the project, Atty. Fisher suggested they work within the existing square footage of what is there now on the lot. Atty. Fisher feels the new plan is much more compatable with the lot size. It is no longer a barn style but is now a modest house. Atty. Fisher stated that the overall footage of the existing house and shed is 1771 square feet and the square footage of the new proposed house (eliminating the shed) is1756 square feet. At this point Mr. White addressed ZBA members, he felt there was such a dramatic change in the plans he wanted to make sure everyone was comfortable with the continuation of the hearing or should ZBA ask the applicant to withdraw and resubmit a new application. Atty. Fisher stated that he felt the Becketts were responding to the neighbors concerns, not creating something new and he would not be opposed to continuing public hearing. There was discussion on the noticing of the continuance, a legal notice did run (but was not required). Richard Kleinberg, a neighbor addressed the ZBA members with his concerns about finding out about the new proposal just this afternoon and feels the new plan doesn't meet any of the objections from last time and only sounds better in comparison to the last plan. Mr. Kleinberg feels that anything that deviates from the repair and use of the existing structures was addressed in the letters from the last meeting. It was the consensus of the members that as long as Atty. Fisher agrees to the continuances they were comfortable continuing. Atty. Fisher was agreeable. Atty. Fisher addressed the issue of not expanding the non conformity by eliminating the attached garage which is now a basement garage. Atty. Fisher noted the house has been moved substantially from the wetland buffer and that the entire existing house is within the wetland setbacks. The existing and proposed houses encroach on the 50' setback to Loomarwick Road. Roger Pratt, architect and Atty. Fisher referenced the site plan to show the setbacks, the original and proposed houses. Mr. Pratt stated that the existing house is 1570 square feet and the existing shed is 201 square feet and added that there is no available land to build on at this site with out encroaching on a setback. Atty. Fisher referenced the hardship issue of having the existing structures legally constructed prior to zoning and wetland regulations, the enactment of the setback regulations made this house illegal he feels there is no self created hardship, legally they are not expanding the non conformity they are decreasing it slightly. He also feels the property is unique in that it is small, narrow and the proximity to the wetlands. There was discussion on the volume of the house and members viewed the photos from last months hearing. Members asked about the number of rooms in the existing house. Atty. Fisher stated that at present the house is defined as having (3) bedrooms and (8) rooms. Mr. Sedito asked for an existing floor plan and calculations for the 1570 square footage. Mr. Pratt stated that he didn't have them the calculations were done by computer. Atty. Fisher went on to state that Mr. Pratt has calculated the site coverage as 12.92% and that only (3) of the original (4) variances are being asked for at this time (they do not need a variance for 17.4.a increasing the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure). The existing septic system is a cesspool and the proposed system would be a pump up system on the south end of the property. Atty. Fisher presented engineered septic plans for a (4) bedroom house. This proposal has not been presented to the health department or the inland/wetland commission. Mr. Pratt stated that the site coverage calculations include the patio, driveways, stairs and walkways outside the house. Mr. Sedito asked for calculations for lot coverage. The parking area has been moved and will not require a large retaining wall only a small retaining wall creating a planting area. Mr. Sedito asked for the hardship of not rebuilding on the same (existing) footprint. Atty. Fisher stated that they were trying to address the concerns neighbors had with polluting the wetlands. Mr. White commented that rebuilding the house in the same spot would have the same impact on the wetlands as it does now. Mr. Pratt stated that you would have to remove all of the existing structure and footing system which would substantially disturb the wetlands. Atty. Fisher stated that they felt it would be better to avoid the wetlands as opposed to Loomarwick Road. Mr. White noted that you're looking at a simple cottage becoming a large structure. Atty. Fisher answered by stating that this is a residence in a residential zone and it's smaller than most people's guest houses. The lot size is 8/10 of an acre. Dirk Sabin, landscape architect walked the members through the existing landscape and proposed plantings. The present structure is 18" form the wetlands. The proposed low fieldstone seeding wall will create a permanent barrier to the wetlands. The general drainage pattern is not toward the wetlands but parallel with the wetlands. The house has been compacted and has a small lawn area (32x30), with lawn/play area over the septic system. There will be minimal grading. Mr. White asked about drainage. Mr. Sabin stated that there is sheet flow through the property and intermittent streams. These will be addressed with curtain drains and field inlets. They added a drywell for roof/driveway runoff. There is a secondary septic system location. The proposed structure has a full basement with (2) car garage, storage, mechanical and potential wine cellar Mr. Pratt went on to explain the floor plan for the proposed house. Mr. Pratt stated that the height is 28' to the peak or 24' to the median line. Ms. Roberts questioned the septic plan and grading of the area; Mr. Pratt stated that the septic plan was for the original proposal and will be redone. There was continued discussion on drainage. Mr. White asked for comments from the public. Richard Kleinberg, a neighbor to the east, feels zoning allows the applicant to repair the existing structure with the existing use. He has heard plans for a very large structure that has nothing to do with the existing structure. Except in comparison with the even larger proposal last time this proposal sounds completely outside the intent of the zoning regulations. Mr. Kleinberg thinks the neighbors should receive more notice. Paul Frank, a close by neighbor, is familiar with the property and existing house. Mr. Frank doesn't think that any renovations of the existing structure would work. He would welcome a different structure on the property provided it met the requirements of ZBA and wetlands. Mr. White explained the option of using the same area now covered or moving the structure further from the wetlands. Do you revive hardship of being close to the same wetlands you've been close to for 40 years as a reason for varying the regulations? Mr. Frank stated that with keeping the protection of the lake in mind, he feels that the further from the wetlands the better. Valerie Friedman questioned the volume of what exists now and what is proposed. Ms. Roberts explained that there is now a (1) story structure with a shallow pitched roof and the proposal is for a (2) story structure with a pitched roof. Lynn Baldwin stated that the downgrade elevation would look substantially higher than the 28'. When measured from the garage floor to the roof (not counting the cupola) it is 37'. Ms. Roberts referenced the (5) points noted in the minutes of the last meeting.
1. now have (1) site plan - doesn't accurately reflect grading for septic area
2. Mr. Neff's perks were done for existing house - Mr. Pratt's perks are for proposed house
3. use is not in the purview of ZBA
4. grading questions have been addressed
5. 12.92% lot coverage with no calculations, driveway grade is 2-5%Ms. Roberts brought up the concerns with not having wetland approval for a variance that will go with the land; it's a very sensitive site. Mr. White brought up two questions; the first questioned the square footage of the original structure and secondly moving the square footage of the shed into the calculations for the original house. Atty. Fisher respects the neighbor's opposition but feels this is a modest house, huge improvement and will improve the valve of the neighbor's homes. Mr. Kleinberg feels that there are about (15) of these non conforming lots on Lake Waramaug and granting this variance would set a bad example, people would get the idea to disregard the zoning regulations and feels this application is outside of the spirit of zoning in the town. Ms. Baldwin agrees with Mr. Kleinberg feels the increased volume will establish a new trend and you will lose the essence of the rural charm of being smaller. Mr. Frank feels the applicant has shown good faith in reducing the size of their proposal; anything will visually improve the site and doesn't think a change on this lot will encourage a wholesale change around the lake. Mr. White encouraged members to look at everything very carefully and do a site visit, in the past the ZBA has been very careful around the lake.
MOTION: to continue ZBA-0316 Request of Mark D. & Chris Adams Beckett, 23 Loomarwick Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (front yard setback), 12.1.1 (wetlands setback), 12.1.2 (septic setback from watercourse), 17.4.a (increasing the nonconformity of a non conforming structure), to demolish an existing structure and erect a new four-bedroom house was made by Ms. Leab, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated regular members Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Todd Catlin.
ZBA-0318, Request of Dinah & Michael Daly and Liza Alldredge, 300 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (side yard setback), and 17.4.a (increasing the non-conformity of a nonconforming building, to add two dormers. Dinah Daly and her builder Bob Nichols were present to represent this application. Mr. White read the applicants letter of request into the record. Ms. Daly oriented members with the site map. Mr. Nichols noted the proposed dormers are inside the eve line. The dormers will allow stand up room in the master bedroom and bathroom which are located upstairs, increase space in the hallway and storage space. They are not adding a bedroom just enlarging an existing bedroom, hall and bathroom. There will be no footprint change. Were other options explored? Mr. Nichols stated that they did not want to enlarge the footprint and this is the least offensive solution. Lynn Baldwin, a neighbor stated she had no objection to the application. Mr. White asked for questions or comments from the public.
MOTION: to close ZBA-0318 Request of Dinah & Michael Daly and Liza Alldredge, 300 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (side yard setback), 17.4.a (increasing the non-conformity of a nonconforming building), to add two dormers was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Ms. Leab stated that variances have been granted before for these situations and it is a modest enough request, she would be in favor of it. Mr. Sedito has no problem with this request; it is not changing a whole lot and is a small request. Mr. Sedito feels the second floor doesn't meet the building code as it is now. Mr. Catlin and Ms. Roberts agree and Mr. White had nothing to add.
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0318 Request of Dinah & Michael Daly and Liza Alldredge, 300 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (side yard setback), 17.4.a (increasing the non-conformity of a nonconforming building), to add two dormers was made by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated regular members Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Georgia Middlebrook.
ZBA-0319, Request of Frank & Julie Dolen, 217 Sabbaday Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (rear and side setbacks), 11.5.1 (coverage), and 17.4.a (increasing the non conformity of a non conforming structure), for an addition to an existing home. Mr. Dolen was present to represent his application and read his letter into the record. Mr. Dolen stated that the gable changes to a shed roof in the back and with the addition it will continue as a gable roof. The porch is rotting and roof needs replacing so now is the time to make changes. Mr. Dolen attempted to buy a horseshoe of land around his property from Steep Rock; they wouldn't sell him the land. The area of extension is 12' x 12'. The overhang is now 4' from the property line. He would be squaring off the house. He has an easement from Steep Rock for his septic system which came with the property. Mr. White asked for further questions and comments from the public.
MOTION: to close ZBA-0319 Request of Frank & Julie Dolen, 217 Sabbaday Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (rear and side setbacks), 11.5.1 (coverage), and 17.4.a (increasing the non conformity of a non conforming structure), for an addition to an existing home was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Ms. Leab stated that Mr. Dolen has tried to acquire land surroundings him which accounts for something. The request is modest and makes sense. Mr. Sedito is in favor of this variance. Ms. Middlebrook feels this request is reasonable and a good solution for the applicants needs. Ms. Roberts agrees and appreciates Mr. Dolen's effort to purchase land surrounding him. Mr. White questioned the hardship issue and discussion ensued.
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0319 Request of Frank & Julie Dolen, 217 Sabbaday Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (rear and side setbacks), 11.5.1 (coverage), and 17.4.a (increasing the non conformity of a non conforming structure), for an addition to an existing home was made by a 5-0 vote.
MOTION: to accept the minutes of the August 21, 2003 regular meeting of the Washington zoning board of Appeals was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.
OTHER BUSINESSMembers discussed ZBA-0220; the land use office received a call from Scott Weaver who was concerned about planting that was to be done around electrical equipment for the Boulder Inn. In reviewing the file planting of shrubs was not part of the variance that was granted by was implied by the contractor. Mr. White stated that it was his observation that shrubs had been planted, they were not mature shrubs and needed to grow. Mr. White will contact the contractor and ask about planting more screening.
Members were given a memo from the Zoning Commission concerning proposed revisions to the zoning regulations.
Fees for the ZBA applications are still $75 & $9.
Pam Osborne, secretary will put out the new application forms.
MOTION: to adjourn was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.
Submitted subject to approval,
Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary
August 21, 2003
MEMBERS PRESENT: Edmund White, Polly Roberts, Brad Sedito, Katharine Leab.
ALTERNATE PRESENT: Ms. Middlebrook and Todd Catlin.
ALSO PRESENT: Ms. Holzworth, John Friedman, Mr. & Mrs. Frank, Mr. & Mrs. Santoleri, Press, Valerie Friedman and Others.Chairman White called the meeting to order and read the legal notice published in Voices on 8/10 and 8/17/03.
PUBLIC HEARING
ZBA-0314, Santoleri, 240 West Shore Rd., request for a Variance from Zoning Regulation 11.5.1a ( max. lot coverage) to install hard landscape.
Mr. White seated the 4 Regular Members and Alternate Middlebrook. Mr. & Mrs. Santoleri were present. Proof of mailings to adjacent property owners was submitted. Mr. White reviewed the file. Ms. Roberts read the letter of request from the Santoleri's, dated ( see file). Lot coverage % approved the last time will not change. Ms. Roberts noted that the fee is $75.00 not $25.00. Mrs. Santoleri said that was probably a typo. Site Plan ( see file for date and title) was reviewed. Mrs. Santoleri said the grass terrace is difficult to use, wants a stone terrace, a retaining wall for the flatter area in the rear, stone steps and a drainage swale. Mrs. Santoleri said that when the driveway was repaved the coverage was less than had been previously approved, that is why they are able to come back and ask for more. The previous application was to rebuild on the same footprint but a larger terrace was made smaller including "bump out" and entryway. Ms. Roberts asked if they had Inland Wetlands approval. Mrs. Santoleri said yes. Mrs. Roberts asked if the parts not paved are indicated in the shaded area on the map. Mrs. Santoleri said yes, she had worked from the Talbot's map with actual field measurements. Mrs. Santoleri explained the discrepancies between what had been previously approved and what actually had been done ( walkway shorter). Mr. Sedito asked if the footprint of the retaining wall are included in the coverage. Mrs. Santoleri said she thinks just the stairs were included. Mrs. Leab asked what the hardship is. Mrs. Santoleri said they are not asking for more, reallocating of what was approved before, actual coverage not changed since 1965 when original house was built. The plan from the 2000 ZBA application was reviewed and compared ( see file for date and title of plan). Mrs. Hill said the stone walls have not been counted and will not be counted unless extending from a structure or something. Mrs. Santoleri noted the exact location proposed for steps. Mrs. Santoleri said it is too steep to use now. Mr. White read a memo from Mr. Martin and paraphrased the telephone conversation they had earlier today. Photos of the existing site were reviewed. Mr. Santoleri said the photos give a better perspective. Mr. White asked how high the retaining wall would be. Mrs. Santoleri said 30". Mr. White said the Health Department had not given approval yet. Mrs. Santoleri said no irrigation system over septic and septic fill will be used throughout. Mr. White noted that they had done a great job with the house. There were no further questions from the Commissioners. Mr. White asked for public input. Valerie Friedman asked if they had considered any natural work along the shore as opposed to hard landscape. Mrs. Santoleri said the Inland Wetland Commission did a site inspection and was impressed with how much natural vegetation exists. They will probably add more at the bottom of the wall. A MOTION to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0314, request of John and Carol Santoleri, 240 West Shore Rd., for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.5.1a (max. lot coverage) to install hard landscape was made by Mr. Sedito, second by Ms. Roberts, all agreed at 8:50 PM.
MEETING
Mrs. Leab said she had big problems with the lack of hardship and trade offs (variance granted for specific work), owner can't take away and add and say it's the same thing. If less is done it doesn't mean there is anything left over to play with. Ms. Middlebrook agreed there really is no hardship but it is within the bounds of what is allowed. Mr. White disagreed and said it isn't and that is why they have reapplied. Ms. Roberts said nonconformity is something you would like to go away, so if less is done, that's good. Mr. White said this is putting new coverage down, although more was approved in the past, this is new; the edge of the lake is what the Commission is concerned about. Mr. Sedito said he agrees with Mrs. Leab, other properties were not allowed trade off in coverage. Ms. Middlebrook said if that was the case then maybe they should not approve this. This is a cosmetic issue not a hardship.
Ms. Roberts and Mr. White agreed with all that has been said. Mr. White read the legal notice and called for a vote. MOTION to approve ZBA-0314, Request of John and Carol Santoreli, 240 West Shore Rd., for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.5.1.a (lot coverage) to install hard landscape was DENIED by a 4 - 1 vote, Mrs. Leab, Mr. Sedito, Ms. Roberts and Mr. White voted no. Ms. Middlebrook voted yes.
PUBLIC HEARING
ZBA-0315, Putnam, 49 Tinker Hill Rd., request for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1c (front yard setback), to construct a one car garage.
Mr. White seated the Regular Members present and Mr. Catlin. Marinette Putnam and John Quist were present. The certified mail receipts were submitted. Mr. White read the letter (see file for date) authorizing Mr. Quist as representative. A letter from Mr. Quist was read into the record (see file for date). A map (see file for date and title) was submitted by Mr. Quist with sketch of the work to be done by Mr. Quist. Mr. Quist pointed out the location of the proposed garage, nearest point to property line is 45 ft., to Tinker Hill Rd. pavement is 70 feet. Mr. Quist said there is a steep drop off and a ledge in the back of the house, it can't be moved in any direction. The dimensions proposed = 24 x 14. Ms. Putnam said there is no garage on the property now. The driveway exists. Mr. Quist pointed out the location of a huge boulder that is 1/2 the size of the Land Use Meeting Room. The garage would come in about a foot from the outside line of the house. They will have room to sing out of the garage safely. Mr. White reviewed the coverage calculations. Ms. Putnam pointed out the map is flat but the land is steep. Mrs. Hill measured the coverage off the map and said it is well below the maximum. Mr. White asked if there is any way they can get around the house to have the garage in the back. Ms. Putnam said no and pointed out the locations of the well and septic. Ms. Middlebrook asked if the house is 2 story. Ms. Putnam said no, one story. Mr. White asked where the secondary field is. Mr. Quist guessed at the location and said the primary is now below the deck. Mr. Quist said there is a large buffer between road and the Putnam line. Mr. Catlin asked what the distance to the other corner of the garage is. Mr. Quist said 50 -55 feet, not exactly sure. There was no public input. A MOTION to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0315. Marinette Putnam, 49 Tinker Hill Rd., for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1c (front yard setback), to construct a one car garage was made by Ms. Roberts, second by Mr. Sedito, all agreed at 8:08 PM.
MEETING
Mr. Sedito said he is satisfied there is no other place to place the garage, owner has a right to have a garage, only 25 feet in the setback, is a clear classic hardship. Mrs. Leab agreed, is minor. Mr. Catlin said it is a classic hardship. Ms. Roberts agreed. Mr. White agreed, due to topography and no other options, is a refreshing hardship. Mr. White read the legal notice and called for a vote. MOTION to APPROVE ZBA-0315, request of Marinette Putnam, 49 Tinker Hill Rd., for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1c (front yard setback) to construct a one car garage was approved 5 - 0.
PUBLIC HEARING
ZBA-0316, Request of Mark and Chris Beckett, 23 Loomarwick Rd., for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1c (front yard setback), 12.1.1 (wetlands setback), 12.1.2 (septic setback from a watercourse), 17.4a (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), to demolish an existing structure and erect a new four bedroom house.
Mr. White read the legal notice and seated the Regular Members and Alternate Middlebrook. Mr. Pratt was present as authorized agent (letter in file). The location of East Shore Road is discussed. Only one receipt from the certified mailing was received. Mr. Pratt showed a list of where the letters were sent. Mr. Pratt did not bring the receipts from the certified mailing. Mr. White noted that there is no proof that everyone was sent a notice. Mr. White recommended that the file be looked at although no vote can be taken until the proof of the certified mailing has been received. Mr. White read a letter from the file (see file for date) to the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Adjustments re the reasons for the variance requests. The letter said the existing footprint is 1008 sq. ft., is in poor shape, the current house is within 18 ft. of wetlands. They plan to demolish what exists and build a new 4 bedroom house. The lot is extremely small. The proposed house is as far from wetlands as possible but only 25 feet from Loomarwick Rd.. Mr. Pratt submitted a revised site plan ( see file) showing the existing house marked in green. Mr. Pratt said the existing house is not livable. The location of an existing shed (156 sq. ft.) is noted. Footprint = 2000sq. ft. Mr. Sedito said that is 2x the existing footage. Mr. Pratt said that includes the garage. Mr. Pratt pointed out on the map the area of disturbance. Mrs. Leab asked if the owner ever lived on site. Mr. Pratt said no. Mr. White as if they can rebuild the same site. Mr. Pratt said no due to the proximity to the wetlands and the foundation would greatly disturb the wetlands. Setback for wetlands and road setback combined do away with any room for building. There is a very small driveway. Mr. Sedito asked how long ago the house was occupied. Mr. Pratt did not know. Ms. Roberts asked if the coverage calculations were done with the proposed house, driveway and turnaround. Mr. Pratt said 15%, but there will be modifications. Mr. Sabin has not finished the plan in detail so he is not sure. Mr. Sedito noted the steep slope. Photos were circulated with a reference sheet explaining where photos were taken from. Ms. Roberts asked if the ledge was indicated on the plan. Mr. Pratt said a small area only. Mr. Pratt said coverage may change due to decrease in patio size. They have not gone to wetlands yet. No Health approval yet. Mr. White read a comment dated 8/21/03 from Zoning Commission Chair Martin re Zoning Commission concerns about lot coverage. There is no request for lot coverage in this case. Mr. White noted engineering input from Dave Wilson. P.E. ( see file for date and comments) including
1. information on two site plans do not agree.
2. information does not agree with what the Health Department has.
(Mr. Pratt and Mr. Neff's percs were done in different areas)
3. The Assessors field cards show seasonal use.
4. there are questions regarding the proposed grading.
5. there may possibly be other variances required ( coverage- one map shows 15% t, 14.7.2 driveway grade, Health code variance for leach field area.
Will require extensive grading. This is a self imposed hardship. The information supplied is incomplete. This should be denied. Mr. Pratt submitted a revised map ( see file). The original map had a "swing' road, but was impossible due to drainage problems. Mr. Pratt said he did not know anything regarding the septic. Mr. Sedito asked how they will get the grades to work. Mr. Pratt said they will have 2 retaining walls, one of which will be 10 ft. tall. Mr. Sedito said that is almost right on the street. Mr. Pratt said that will have to be worked out. These developments await Mr. Sabin's review / plan. Mr. White said the Commissioners could not act on a piece meal application. The Commission perceived there will also be coverage problems. Mr. Pratt said he did not think so, he will submit the calculations of the revised plan later. Ms. Roberts asked, abandon SE1? Mr. Pratt said yes, but doesn't have the complete plan yet. Mr. Pratt said the proposed house has 4 bedrooms, 4400 sq. ft., shows the front elevation, is a one story building. Mr. Pratt offered to show the full set of plans. Ms. Roberts read a letter ( see file for date) from Mr. Kleinberg and Mrs. Schemen, adjoining property owners with there input.
They said the application does not fall within intent of Zoning Regs, is a steep and boggy lot, the Beckett's owned 167 Loomarwick Rd., cottage was in poor condition when it was bought in 1997. The application is not a hardship, they could have it repaired but they choose to build a new house. The vertical distance over 42 ft. high, one of the largest houses on one of the smallest lots. Location is next to a state park. There is a year round watercourse on the property plus one immediately east about 50 feet from the property line. There is also a seasonal watercourse on West Shore Rd. There is no external sign that the building is on the verge of collapse. Mr. White said additional information has been supplied by the Schemen's (see file for letter) of 169 West Shore Rd. The letter included information about the well. 167, 169 and 183 West Shore Rd. share a water source. A letter from Mr. Young ( see file ) said he totally opposes the application, no way it meets the current land use requirements. Zoning and Wetland Regulations should be strictly enforced. Mr. Kleinberg presented notes and letters already read. Ms. Roberts said she would like to see the elevations of the house. Mr. Pratt showed elevations " A-SP" and additional sheets dated July 31, 2004. Not on slab, is a full basement. The floor plans were reviewed; 1st floor show living room down 3 steps with patio not shown (not final), 2nd floor shows 4 bedrooms, 3 baths, laundry, one bedroom has a sitting room. 3rd floor nook is library with deck and storage. Front and rear elevations. Average grade to peak = 37 ft. incomplete with height requirements. Ms. Roberts asked when measuring was the highest point the roof, where did they measure too. Mrs. Hill said mid point highest roof. Ms. Roberts asked when they will go before Wetlands Commission. Mrs. Leab said there is not enough information to make a decision, need a precise finished plan. Mr. White said this hard for them to consider piecemeal. Mr. Pratt said the plans are in progress. Mr. Pratt said the location of the house is set. Mr. White asked if a discussion had been held with the owners re: reusing the existing footprint. Mr. Pratt said yes but it is too close to wetlands. Mr. Sedito asked what is the hardship in doubling the footprint and quadrupling the total size of the building. Mr. Pratt said these are the owners' needs as far as living, hardship is in the site not the plan. Mr. Sedito asked if the owners once owned the adjoining property. Mr. Pratt said yes but they sold it. The owner may lease this for awhile. Ms. Roberts said the neighbors think this is much too large compared to what exists, great impact on the lot. Ms. Roberts said she appreciates the location away from wetlands. Mrs. Leab said this is a change of use. Mr. White asked what the hardship is, can they rebuild on the same spot. Mr. Pratt said rebuilding on the same spot will in no way meet the family requirements. Mrs. Leab said the owners did not come in blind. Mr. White asked the Commission if they need additional information for the continuance of the Public Hearing. Ms. Roberts said a more complete site plan with drainage and engineering. Mr. Sedito asked them to specify the hardship. Mr. Pratt said the setback hardship is clear. Mr. Sedito said to give them the option to withdraw and submit something more modest. Mr. White told Mr. Pratt that was up to him and his client. Mr. White said the Commission is tough around the lake, location of this lot touches water use. The Commission would need hardship. Mr. White said at this moment there are no positive comments, can continue or withdraw and rethink. Verification of notification is needed. Mr. White read a list of variance requests. Mrs. Leab asked, plus driveway grades? Mr. White said a variance is needed if beyond maximum grade requirements. Mr. Pratt said the driveway grade will be zero. Mr. Sedito said to do so requires a major retaining wall. Mr. Kleinberg and Mr. Wilson made a point that retaining walls will cut below the water table and cause drainage problems between wetlands and existing road, There is no place for drainage to go. Mr. Sedito noted that normally the ZBA sees plans after the client goes to Wetlands. Mr. White said this is a square peg in a round hole. Mr. Sedito asked if they could vote tonight. Mr. White said all notification has not been received. Ms. Roberts asked if a hydrology report had been done. Mr. Pratt said a soil report only. Drainage is clear on site, is percolating water throughout the entire site. He does not know if it is going down to the water table. Can put a wall there but doesn't know about drainage plan. Mr. White asked if he could get the needed information for the next meeting. Mr. Pratt said yes. A MOTION to CONTINUE THE Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0136, Request of Mark and Chris Beckett, 23 Loomarwick Rd., for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.1.6c (front yard setback ), 12.1.1. ( wetlands setback ), 12.1.2. ( setback from watercourse ), 17.4a ( increasing nonconformity of an nonconforming structure ), to demolish an existing structure and erect a new four bedroom house was made by Ms. Roberts, second by Mrs. Leab, all agreed.
PUBLIC HEARING
ZBA-0317, Request of Washington Montessori Association, 240 Litchfield Turnpike, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 16.4.1 ( size of sign ), to install a sign.
Mr. White read the legal notice and seated the Regular Members and Alternate Catlin. Mr. Friedman of the Board of Trustees was present. Mr. Friedman submitted copies of certified mailing and a list of all notified. Mrs. Leab stepped down as a former member of the Board of Trustees. Mr. White seated Ms. Middlebrook. Mr. White read a letter ( see file ) from Mr. McNaughton re; the reasons for the variance request. A 2 sided 4 x 2 foot sign (rendering included) is requested. Sign will be on Washington Montessori property, west of the driveway. Mr. Friedman said a 2 square foot sign is now allowed in Residential Zone. Mr. Friedman noted the location of the driveway. Across the street is commercially zoned, only entrance is off a busy, fast roadway. Cars speed, not a conventional residential area. Cars go 2 xs as fast as most residential areas, therefore they need larger lettering. Instead of 1x2 they want 2x4. They said they have a safety concern so they need to enlarge the sign. This is the only way to get to the school. Mr. Friedman pointed out the location of the sign on the plot plan attached to the letter ( see file ). Mr. Friedman did not know if there is a setback issue. Signage rules were briefly discussed. This is not an advertisement it is the name of the school. Mr. Catlin said the Gunnery has a 24" square sign. Mr. Friedman said their name is longer. Washington Primary has 6 or 8 foot long sign. Mr. Friedman noted the Primary School is on a quiet road. Mr. Friedman said they want the size large enough to be seen for safety. Mr. Friedman said the sign is 3 feet from the property line, foliage further back. Someone else's property down the road. Is a culvert on the other side of the driveway with brook and guardrail, there is only a couple of feet of space. They don't want the sign in front of the Profita property. 2 x 4 is only adequate not large, will be able to see the lettering from 200 ft. away. Lettering will be at least 2.7" tall. Mr. Hill said that looks small for the area. Mr. Friedman said the traffic is so fast they fear accidents, although the site lines are ok. The posts will have finials at the top. 58 1/2 inches in height. There was no public comment. A MOTION to close the PUBLIC HEARING Re: ZBA-0317, request of Washington Montessori Association, 240 Litchfield Turnpike, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 16.4.1 ( size of sign ) to install a sign was made by Ms. Roberts, all agreed.
MEETING
Mr. Sedito said even the residential zone is non residential use, sees a hardship regarding the safety, would allow 12 sq, ft. in commercial zone, would like to see 10 ft. back on property line but understands why this is proposed where it is. He is in favor of this variance. Mr. Catlin said he agreed, safety issue important, independent education is a good friend of Washington. Ms. Middlebrook said the size and location are necessary for safety, not advertising, is location. Ms. Middlebrook used the Bee Brook Condo sign as an example and said it is not visible is a safety issue. Ms. Roberts agreed, is a safety issue, very modest size. Mr. Sedito said he disapproves of this type of variance for a restaurant, a school is different. Ms. Middlebrook asked if the ZBA suggests they go larger. Mr. White said no. Mr. White said schools are a permitted use in a residential district, was approved as an institutional situation, they are caught in the middle, not a business. Mr. Sedito said this is a very main road, different than the gunnery. Mr. White said road speed and safety are a concern. Mr. White is in favor of the variance. Mr. White read the legal notice and called for a vote. APPROVED by a 5 - vote.
A MOTION to ACCEPT the minutes of the last meeting with the following corrections; spelling of Todd Catlin not Caitlin. Mrs. Leab noted on page three, next to last line should be owner not owners. Motion to ACCEPT the minutes as corrected was made by Ms. Roberts, second by Mr. Sedito, all agreed.
Mr. White said Mr. Averill wrote a note to and wished the Commission good luck.
Election for Vice Chair. Mrs. Leab nominated Ms. Roberts. Mr. White closed the nominations. All agreed, 4 0 Ms. Roberts for Vice Chair. Ms. Roberts abstained.
Ms. Roberts redid variance application, ZEO appeal form and guidelines for petitioners. A disc was left for the Secretary to hang on to. Fee $75.00, $9.00 so it can be used right away. Put on website so it can be downloaded.
The Secretary will confirm with the Selectmen the request for fees to go up in an ordinance at a Town Meeting. Variances, Special exceptions and ZEO all $100.00. Sate tax $9.00.
Mrs. Hill passed out draft revision of Regulations.
A MOTION to ADJOURN was made by Mr. Sedito at 9:31. All agreed.
Submitted subject to approval
Susan E. Hamilton
August 27, 2003
July 24, 2003
Members Present: Edmund White, Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Todd Caitlin
Guests: Sandy Moran, Mr. & Mrs. KhouriThe Chairman, Edmund White called the meeting to order at 7:35pm.
Mr. White welcomed Mr. Caitlin to the commission. Mr. Caitlin is filling the alternate position made by the resignation of Bruce Skoog in April 2003; this position runs through November of 2005. Mr. White also noted the resignation of regular member Reese Owens and alternate member Heman Averill, both resignations effective July 21, 2003. Mr. White went on to say that the First Selectman will not be appointing people to these positions. They will be filled by the November elections.
Mr. White read the legal notice for tonight's Public Hearings.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED
Mr. White seated regular members Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Todd Caitlin. It was noted that Ms. Leab and Mr. Caitlin listened to the tape for the Public Hearing on ZBA-0311.
ZBA-0311 Continued, Request of Semco Realty LLC, 223 Litchfield Turnpike, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 16.5.1 (signage setback), to install a sign. Sandy Moran was present to represent the continuation of this application. Ms. Moran did not have the survey requested by the commission. Ms. Moran stated that according to the survey all signage except for (1) inside post on the large sign closest to Litchfield are on state property. Mr. White stated that the ZBA has no jurisdiction on signage located on state property. Ms. Moran asked if they could repaint existing signs. Mr. White stated that people are allowed to make repairs to signage. At this point Mr. White told Ms. Moran that the ZBA could vote on the application or she could withdraw her application. Ms. Moran withdrew her application.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated regular members Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Todd Caitlin.
ZBA-0313 Request of Ann Khouri, 75 Green Hill Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.5.1.a (lot coverage), 17.4 (increase the non-conformity of a non-conforming structure), 11.6.1 (setback), for additions to existing home. Ann Khouri was present to represent this application. Ms. Khouri read her letters of June 27, 2003 and July 18, 2003 into record; she also highlighted a letter of revised/amended notes dated July 24, 2003. Ms. Kouri explained the proposed changes to the northeast corner of the structure which sits on a lot of about 1/2 acre. At this time the second story is inadequately supported and sagging. The proposed changes would add (3) new columns with footings, extend the roof line and eaves. This would add 47.31 square feet and increase lot coverage by 0.186%. Ms. Khouri is also proposing a new south entry that would be 5'x4", this would be an additional 20square feet and increased lot coverage of 0.265%. Not figured into her calculations are the removal of an asphalt walkway at 112 square feet and removal of a front entry at 35 square feet. These two structures were removed in the fall of 2002 and are not to be rebuilt. A letter of support for the proposed changes from the Historical District Commission Chairman was received. Mr. White asked for questions and comments from the public.
MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0313 Request of Ann Khouri, 75 Green Hill Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.5.1.a (lot coverage), 17.4 (increase the non-conformity of a non-conforming structure), 11.6.1 (setback), for additions to existing home was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Ms. Roberts is in favor of this application it's a modest request and she understands the need to support the northeast corner of the structure. Ms. Leab and Mr. Sedito are in agreement. Mr. Caitlin feels these changes will be beneficial. Mr. White feels these changes will enhance the life of an old home.
MOTION: to approve: ZBA-0313 Request of Ann Khouri, 75 Green Hill Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.5.1.a (lot coverage), 17.4 (increase the non-conformity of a non-conforming structure); 11.6.1 (setback), for additions to existing home was made by a 5-0 vote.
MOTION: to accept the minutes of the June 19, 2003 Regular Meeting and the July 10, 2003 Special Meeting of the Washington Zoning Board of Appeals was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.
OTHER BUSINESS/DISCRETION OF THE CHAIR
Members continued their discussion of the revised ZBA application and the new ZBA special exception application. Ms. Roberts had the newest revised version of the ZBA Application and Ms. Leab had the latest special exception application. Pam Osborne, secretary will look into the $9.00 state fee on the special exception application. Ms. Roberts will talk with David Owens of the Zoning Commission on the changes to Section 17.4 of the Zoning Regulations.
MOTION: to adjourn was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Mr. Catlin, by a 5-0 vote at 9:05pm.
Submitted subject to approval,
Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary
June 19, 2003
Members Present: Edmund White, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Georgia Middlebrook
Guests: Mr. & Mrs. Bill Risley, Thomas & Sandy Moran, Dorota HabibMr. White, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30pm and read the legal notice for tonight's Public Hearings.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED
Mr. White excused himself from this public hearing. Mr. Owens seated regular members Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Georgia Middlebrook. It was noted that Mr. Sedito had listened to the tape for the May 15th Public Hearing regarding ZBA-0310.
ZBA-0310 Request of Bill Risley, 72 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (side yard set back), 17.4 (increase nonconformity of a nonconforming building), 11.5.1.a (lot coverage), for additions to existing garage. It was noted that certified mailing notice was returned unclaimed by Kate Jennings of 63 Wykeham Road. It was also noted for the record that the Risley's are using the second set of plans submitted by Peter Talbot, dated May 15th, 2003. Mr. Owens started the public hearing by reviewing the lot coverage questions concerning this property. The main question was the installation of an inground pool without a variance being granted. The zoning permit for the pool was issued in 1998 to the prior owner. There was misinformation on this application which led the Zoning Enforcement Officer to believe that the lot was (4) acres. At this point Mr. Risley addressed members about the pool and the discussion at last months public hearing about removing it to alleviate the lot coverage issue. Mr. Risley found out that the prior owners installed the pool for use by their grandchildren and Mr. Risley feels he would like to keep the pool for the same reasons. Discussion moved on to the present application for additions to the existing garage. Mr. Risley described the present structure as cinder block with a gravel floor and particle board doors. He wants it to have the look of "a little barn". They are adding an interior staircase for access to the upper potion of the barn. The intent is to create storage space. Mr. Owens asked about ownership of the adjoining parcel. Mr. Risley stated that Mr. Miller purchased the (16) acre parcel for protection of his property and intends to keep it as it is. Ms. Roberts asked about removing the request to vary lot coverage because it was no longer an issue. Mr. Risley added that he had an engineer locate a site for a back up septic system on the property. Mr. Owens asked for any further questions or comments from the public.
MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0310 Request of Bill Risley, 72 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (side yard set back), 17.4 (increase nonconformity of a nonconforming building), 11.5.1.a (lot coverage), for additions to existing garage was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 4-0 vote.
MEETING
Ms. Middlebrook feels that this proposal is a distinct improvement and that the problems have been settled. Ms. Roberts agrees that it will look better and likes the fact that they are keeping it within the existing footprint. Mr. Sedito feels it will be an attractive improvement. Mr. Owens also agrees and added that this is a height and setback issue with no lot coverage problem. Members asked Mr. Risley's to submit a letter to remove the request for a variance to Zoning Regulation 11.5.1.a (lot coverage).
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0310 Request of Bill Risley, 72 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (side yard set back), 17.4 (increase nonconformity of a nonconforming building), 11.5.1.a (lot coverage), for additions to existing garage, by a 4-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated regular members Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Georgia Middlebrook.
ZBA-0311 Request of Semco Realty LLC, 223 Litchfield Turnpike, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 16.5.1 (signage setback), to install a sign. Thomas and Sandy Moran the property owners were present to represent this application. Ms. Moran read the letter of application into the record. The Moran's are looking to clean up the property. At present there is a flag pole 9' from the road and (2) signs at either end of the property. They intent to remove all three of these signs. Mr. White did a site visit and feels the locations of the existing signs are treacherous and questions if the flag pole is located on state property. Mr. Sedito asked about the location of the property line. Mr. Moran stated that the flag pole closest to the road is 9' off the soft shoulder of the road. Mr. White asked if other options had been explored for signage. Ms. Moran said they could use the existing signs. Mr. Owens feels the level of improvement is so great that he has no problem with the proposed sign. Mr. Sedito asked for an exact location for the sign on a survey. Discussion focused on the height of the proposed sign at 6'. Mr. Moran stated that he wanted people from out of town to be able to locate the restaurant. If height is an issue he is willing to change it. Mr. White is bothered by the height of the proposed sign and the sight line down the road. Mr. White did add that there are limited opportunities for a sign because the area is dense on both sides of the property and nothing can be viewed from the back. Ms. Middlebrook suggested that a "mock up" be made of the proposed sign so members could view the actual height and location. Ms. Roberts is not worried about the height; this proposal will be a big improvement and will cut down on the signage. Mr. Owens added that safety and position are the concerns and the property line needs to be found. At this point Mr. Moran stated that he had the property surveyed that morning and the front door of the building is 50' from the property line. Mr. White asked Mr. Moran to have the surveyor locate the existing flag pole on the survey map and to do a "mock up" sign. He asked that Mr. Moran notify the ZBA office when the "mock up" is ready so members can do a site visit.
MOTION: to continue the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0311 Request of Semco Realty LLC, 223 Litchfield Turnpike, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 16.5.1 (signage setback), to install a sign was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Reese Owens, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Georgia Middlebrook.
ZBA-0312 Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.a (front yard setback), 17.4.a (increase the non-conformity of a non conforming structure), for addition of peaked roof to existing building. Dorota Habib was present to represent this application. Mr. White read the letter of request into record. Ms. Habib brought pictures of the existing flat roof from various views. There is a safety issue with children climbing on the flat roof and the new peaked roof will help with maintenance. The proposed peaked roof will look like the other campus buildings and help the campus be uniform according to Ms. Habib. The roof will be gabled toward the road. The approximate height increase will be 9'8". Mr. White asked for further questions and public comment.
MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0312 Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.a (front yard setback), 17.4.a (increase the non-conformity of a non conforming structure), for addition of peaked roof to existing building was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Owens, by a 4-0 vote.
MEETING
Ms. Roberts has no problem with this application, adding that the peaked roof is understandable and there is no increase in usable volume. Ms. Middlebrook feels the new roof will improve the situation and will be a good improvement. Mr. Owens added that the building is a legal nonconforming structure and he feels this qualifies as a repair. He has no issues with this application. Mr. White feels that this application is cleaning up the 1960's flat roof idea and he appreciates how Rumsey Hall provides its information.
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0312 Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.a (front yard setback), 17.4.a (increase the non-conformity of a non conforming structure), for addition of peaked roof to existing building, by a 4-0 vote.
MOTION: to accept the minutes of May 15, 2003 meeting of the Washington Zoning Board of Appeals was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Ms. Middlebrook, by a 5-0 vote.
MOTION: to accept the minutes of the June 12, 2003 special meeting of the Washington Zoning Board of Appeals was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.
Members went over the proposed lot coverage definition and agreed to forward it to the Zoning Commission.
Members received copies and correspondence from Mike Zizka about the revamped ZBA application. A special meeting was scheduled for July 10, 2003 at 6:00pm to review this revamped application and a special exception application that Ms. Leab has been working on.
At this point the Chairman, Ed White thanked all members for the extra work and hours they have been putting in on proposed regulation and application changes.
MOTION: to adjourn was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Middlebrook, by a 5-0 vote at 8:55pm.
Submitted subject to approval,
Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary
May 15, 2003
Members Present: Edmund White, Reese Owens, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Heman Averill, Georgia Middlebrook
Guests: David Wilson, Peter Talbot, Arthur Miller, Bill Risley, publicEdmund White, Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30pm, noting that Ms. Leab and Mr. Sedito would be absent from tonight's meeting.
Mr. White read into record Bruce Skoog's letter of resignation.
The Chairman read the legal notice for tonight's public hearings and read a letter of withdraw for ZBA-0303 from Dean Sarjeant.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Reese Owens, Polly Roberts, himself and alternates Heman Averill and Georgia Middlebrook.
ZBA-0309 Request of Kirsten Feldman & Hugh Frater, 123 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 17.4.a (nonconforming building renovation), to renovate existing boat house. David Wilson was present to represent this application. Mr. White read the applicant's letter of request into the record. Mr. Wilson brought several pictures of the existing boat house and explained the proposed renovations to the building which would cover and enclose the wooden deck and cantilever the building toward the lake to allow room for storage of a rowing skull. Mr. Wilson also submitted a letter from neighbor Robert Hackney stating that he has no objection to the application. Mr. White asked if the applicants had thought of installing a rack off of the end of the piers and using a canvas cover for the skull. Mr. Owens addressed the hardship issue of asking for a variance for a recreational skull. Mr. Averill stated that the increase in volume would be about 25%. Ms. Roberts questioned how the boat house would look from the road with the proposed renovations; the boat house is right on the road. Mr. Wilson stated that the project was originally bigger but was scaled down and the ends of the building will look the same. Mr. White asked about moving the piers, to accommodate the skull but keeping the building size the same. Mr. White asked for further questions and comments from the public.
MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0309 Request of Kirsten Feldman & Hugh Frater, 123 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 17.4.a (nonconforming building renovation), to renovate existing boat house, was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Mr. Averill has concern with the 25% volume increase and feels there is no hardship in the "temporary use" for a rowing skull by the present owner. The addition will remain forever. Ms. Middlebrook doesn't feel the change will be that noticeable but does agree that there is no true hardship. Mr. Owens likes the look of the new building better but agrees with Mr. Averill in that this is a user related issue not a site related issue. Mr. Owens also feels that the objective could be achieved with out enlarging the building and that the enlarged building will reduce the view of the lake. Mr. White thinks the new look is great but that it can be done on the existing structure without the addition, it's a tight spot. Ms. Roberts agrees with other members.
MOTION: to deny ZBA-0309 Request of Kirsten Feldman & Hugh Frater, 123 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 17.4.a (nonconforming building renovation), to renovate existing boat house, by a 4-1 vote.
Mr. White, Mr. Owens, Ms. Roberts, Mr. Averill voted to deny.
Ms. Middlebrook voted to approve.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White excused himself from this public hearing. Mr. Owens seated regular members Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Heman Averill and Georgia Middlebrook.
ZBA-0310 Request of Bill Risley, 72 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (side yard set back), 17.4 (increase nonconformity of a nonconforming building), 11.5.1.a (lot coverage), for additions to existing garage. Peter Talbot was present to represent this application and read the letter of request into record. At this time Mr. Talbot submitted a new letter of request and revised drawings. The revised plans took away the 8x2 addition and reduced the roof line by 3', which took away the loft. The applicants want to abide by the zoning regulations as much as possible and have eliminated additions to the footprint in hopes of reducing the lot coverage issue. A neighbor had concerns about the height of the addition so the applicant reduced the height by 3' and also reduced the number and size of windows. The existing garage was built with a variance. The house is a 3 story "barn" style with no storage or closets. With the proposed addition they will achieve one floor of storage. The access to the proposed storage area will be graded and filled in so as to walk into the upper story. The applicant wants to create a "little barn". At this point discussion turned to lot coverage and zoning permits that were granted, to prior owners, for an addition and pool without requiring a variance. Mr. Owens questioned the present legal status of the lot. Ms. Roberts stated that the new plans removed the issue of lot coverage. Mr. Owens is uncomfortable granting a variance on an illegal lot. Mr. Talbot took a moment to speak with the applicants. The applicants are willing to remove the pool to help with the lot coverage issue. Mr. Owens wants to learn more about the property. Mr. Talbot objected because he felt there is no longer a lot coverage issue. Arthur Miller, a neighbor, came forward; he stated that he had spoken to Mr. Talbot about his concern with the second story addition. With the revised plans presented Mr. Miller no longer has an objection. Mr. Averill asked about volume increase which Mr. Talbot stated that they doubled the size of the existing structure. Mr. Averill added that he doesn't like to leverage with property owners about hastily getting rid of a pool and feels that with the submission of the new plans it is not inappropriate to continue the hearing. Mr. Risley spoke on his own behalf that they were trying to turn this property into their home and change a cheap structure into a country barn at the same time give up the pool to lessen lot coverage.
MOTION: to continue the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0310 Request of Bill Risley, 72 Wykeham Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (side yard set back), 17.4 (increase nonconformity of a nonconforming building), 11.5.1.a (lot coverage), for additions to existing garage, was made by Mr. Averill, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 4-0 vote.
MOTION: to accept the minutes of the April 17, 2003 was made by Mr. Averill, seconded Mr. White, by a 5-0 vote.
MOTION: to adjourn was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Averill, by a 5-0 vote at 9:35pm.
Submitted subject to approval,
Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary
April 17, 2003
Members Present: Edmund White, Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Heman Averill, Georgia Middlebrook, Bruce Skoog
Guests: David Grubb, Thomas Farmen, Curt Smith, Dorota Habib, Peter Klemm, Ann Burton, Javier Macaya, Brian NeffChairman, Edmund White called the meeting to order at 7:30pm and read the legal notice for today's public hearings.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White excused himself from this public hearing. Mr. Owens seated regular members Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Bruce Skoog.
ZBA-0301, Request of Caroline & David Grubb, 4 Parsonage Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.5.1 (lot coverage), to construct a walkway. David Grubb was present to represent his application. Mr. Grubb told members that he had spoken with the McMaster family, prior owners, and they told him there was a previous walkway. Mr. Grubb also corrected his original information and stated that the walkway was 60 feet long and 4' wide, he had originally stated that the walkway was 3' wide. Mr. Grubb supplied the lot coverage figures members had asked for. Mr. Owens asked about the shared driveway. Mr. Grubb informed him that the driveway is shared by (3) property owners and metal pins exist in the driveway showing the property boundary. Mr. Sedito asked if it is certain that there was a preexisting walkway. Mr. Grubb said yes. At this point Mr. Grubb stated that he regrets the preconstruction of the walkway before a variance was issued. Mr. Owens asked for further questions or comments from the public.
MOTION: to close Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0301 Request of Caroline & David Grubb, 4 Parsonage Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.5.1 (lot coverage), to construct a walkway, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Mr. Skoog is undecided about granting this variance, the new walkway seems large. Ms. Roberts is irritated by the fact that the walkway is already built, 15% lot coverage is allowed and the addition of this walkway makes the lot coverage just under 21%. She does feel that a walkway is a reasonable request. Ms. Leab feels a narrower walkway would be better, the present one is too wide. Mr. Sedito agreed, he would like to see the walkway smaller, but added that a residence deserves a walkway. Mr. Owens commented that an after the fact application makes it difficult for the commission to see things objectively. Mr. Owens questioned the need for a survey but felt the lot coverage numbers looked official enough.
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0301 Request of Caroline & David Grubb, 4 Parsonage Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.5.1 (lot coverage), to construct a walkway, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Bruce Skoog.
ZBA-0302 Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 12.1.3 (building within 200 feet of Bantam River), 17.4 (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for reconstruction of a dormitory/faculty apartment. Present to represent this application were Curt Smith surveyor/engineer, Thomas Farmen, headmaster of Rumsey Hall School and Dorota Habib, business manager. Mr. Farmen started by recapping the project for members. He presented enrollment figures dating back to 1979 and projecting to 2004. There are no plans to increase the boarding population. The septic will not allow an increase in beds. Mr. Farmen also brought maps showing the entire Rumsey campus. Mr. White asked about other locations for the students housed in Gros Cottage now. Mr. Farmen explained that students are housed according to grade/class, they do have (2) ninth grade dorms but there is no room in the other dormitory for these students. Between the river and road set backs there is only a sliver off land for a new dorm and that is a topographical hardship. Mr. Owens asked why the building couldn't be smaller. Ms. Habib said that the building is being built off site, a pre-fab and could only be built in increments of 3'; there are also oversize load road restrictions and ADA requirements to take into consideration. Mr. White noted that the chimney needs to be drawn on the plans. Ms. Roberts noted that the entire cottage is totally within the 200' river set back. There was discussion on whether to build a deck or patio. Members felt that a patio would be a more moderate expansion. Reese asked about the color of the finished building. Mr. Farmen assumed that it would be white as all the other buildings on campus are white. The cottage will appear bigger if it is painted white. Mr. White asked for any further questions or comments from the public.
MOTION: to close Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0302 Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 12.1.3 (building within 200 feet of Bantam River), 17.4 (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for reconstruction of a dormitory/faculty apartment, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Ms. Roberts has no problem granting this variance, she understands the need for the change to a two story building. The building will appear much larger, but will not really increase much. Mr. Skoog feels hardship is evident and there is no huge volume increase. Ms. Leab feels that Rumsey Hall School has worked hard to solve their problem and have come up with a good solution. Mr. Owens thinks this request is a very reasonable modernization of the building /updating the facility. He would like to think that the building didn't need to be two stories but in the final analysis a reduction of the volume closes to the river in exchange for a little more volume that is closer to the road/ closer to the conforming area is worthwhile. Mr. Owens is satisfied that the building is where it needs to be and is a rightful continuation of the service that Rumsey Hall School has always offered. Mr. White agrees with the other members and understands the need to group the students together the way they do and he feels they have exhausted all other options.
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0302 Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 12.1.3 (building within 200 feet of Bantam River), 17.4 (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for reconstruction of a dormitory/faculty apartment, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts and himself.
ZBA-0306 Request of Christina & Peter Klemm, 11 Ives Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (minimum front yard setback), and 17.4 (increasing nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for an addition to an existing home. Mr. White read a letter from Sandra Canning into the record. Peter Klemm was present to represent this request and read his letter of request into the record. Mr. Klemm confirmed that this addition will replace the existing kitchen and deck and that the variance would be for 3.5 feet. Mr. Owens questioned the location of the present deck and Mr. Klemm confirmed that it goes to the edge of the house or within 6" of the edge. The footprint difference between what exists and what is proposed is approximately 3-4 square feet difference. Members questioned why this addition wasn't part of the prior request for a variance. Mr. Klemm explained that after living in the house they have found that the kitchen is inadequate for their needs and they feel they need a "country kitchen". Mr. White went over well and septic location. At this point Mr. White asked for further questions or comments from the public.
MOTION: to close Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0306 Request of Christina & Peter Klemm, 11 Ives Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (minimum front yard setback), and 17.4 (increasing nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for an addition to an existing home, was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Ms. Leab feels this is an overall minimum situation. Ms. Roberts has no problem with this request the location is best. Mr. Sedito added that 95% of this addition is outside the setback and commented on the good information that was provided to members. Mr. Owens is in favor of granting this variance and also feels the location is best. Mr. White is in agreement with members.
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0306 Request of Christina & Peter Klemm, 11 Ives Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (minimum front yard setback), and 17.4 (increasing nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for an addition to an existing home, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, himself and alternate Heman Averill.
ZBA-0307 Request of Ann M. Burton, 7 South Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (minimum set back) and 17.4 (increasing nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for an addition to an existing home. Mr. White read (2) letters and (1) memo into the record, from Doug Smith, Don & April Crumrine and Rex Swain & Polly Roberts. Ann Burton was present to represent her application. Ms. Burton read her letter of request into the record. Mr. Owens asked about a survey. Ms. Burton referred to the map on file for the property. There are no coverage issues concerning this property. Ms. Burton commented that the addition doesn't enlarge the footprint and the addition will remain lower than the roof line. Because of out buildings and the location of well and septic there are limited alternatives. Ms. Burton added that the tin roof will be cut into and replaced. Mr. White asked for further questions and comments from the public.
MOTION: to close Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0307 Request of Ann M. Burton, 7 South Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (minimum set back) and 17.4 (increasing nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for an addition to an existing home, was made by Ms. Leab, seconded by Mr. Averill, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Ms. Leab stated that this is a difficult property and there in lies the hardship. She feels this is a small matter. Mr. Averill agrees and added that this is a minimal increase on a non conforming property. Mr. Sedito has nothing to add except that this is a reasonable request. Mr. Owens feels the house will be none the worse and that the addition will make the house nicer. Mr. White agrees and feels there is no other way to go.
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0307 Request of Ann M. Burton, 7 South Street, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6.1.c (minimum set back) and 17.4 (increasing nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for an addition to an existing home, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts and himself.
ZBA-0308 Request of Javier & Claudia Macaya, 7 Worcester Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.4 (enlargement of non conforming structure) and 11.6.1.c (minimum front yard setback), to enlarge an existing barn. Javier Macaya and Brian Neff represented this application. The secretary noted that she hadn't received back any certified mailing cards, only one undeliverable letter addressed to Ashley Goodale & Chritopher Muse. The applicant has submitted a list of neighbors and receipts of certified mailing to those neighbors. Mr. Neff read the letter of request into record. Mr. Neff explained that the barn is right on the road and referenced the sketch of the existing barn. There will be no enlargement in footprint. The roof will be raised to accommodate insulation; a cupola will be added to the roof and an interior chimney built. Mr. Neff added that technically this is an increase in volume it would conform if the barn was back further on the property. Mr. Sedito inquired as to what the barn is used for now. The applicant stated that the barn is used for storage and entertainment. The changes being made would accommodate the same uses all year around, as they are also adding a heating system. Mr. White asked for further questions and public comment.
MOTION: to close Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0308 Request of Javier & Claudia Macaya, 7 Worcester Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.4 (enlargement of non conforming structure) and 11.6.1.c (minimum front yard setback), to enlarge an existing barn, was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Mr. Sedito has no problem with this moderate request. Ms. Leab stated that the request is small and minimal. Ms. Roberts also has no problem with this request. Mr. Owens feels this is a small price to maintain the character of the barn. Mr. White has nothing to add.
MOTION: to approve: ZBA-0308 Request of Javier & Claudia Macaya, 7 Worcester Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 17.4 (enlargement of non conforming structure) and 11.6.1.c (minimum front yard setback), to enlarge an existing barn, by a 5-0 vote.
MOTION: to accept the minutes of March 20, 2002 meeting with the following amendments: spelling corrections page (4) line (6) replace guest with "guess" and replace president with "precedent", page (6) line (3) replace Zebra's with "ZBA"; also on page (4) under MEETING the first line to read: Ms. Leab felt that because of the practices over time and Janet Hill's.....; also on page 5 under MEETING the third line to read Ms. Roberts reiterated 17.4.a should be added to the call.
Other Business
Members discussed Zoning Regulations 17.4.b.. It was decided to meet with members of the Zoning Commission to discuss the wording and intent of 17.4.b. .
MOTION: to adjourn was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.
Submitted subject to approval,
Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary
March 20, 2003
Members Present: Edmund White, Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Bruce Skoog
Guests: Jane Sarjeant, Curt Smith, David Grubb, Rick Spooner, Natalie Dyer, Ira Bloom, James Kelly, Scott Rudin, Janet Hill, Public, PressThe Chairman Edmund White called the meeting to order at 7:40pm and read the legal notice for tonight's public hearings.
Noting that there would not be a quorum for the first two (2) applications Mr. White started with number three (3) on the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated regular members Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts and himself.
ZBA-0303,Request of Dean & Jane Sarjeant, 28 Tinker Hill Road/34 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1 (setback), to construct a boat house. Jane Sarjeant and Kurt Smith, of Bradford Smith & Sons were present to represent this application. Ms. Sarjeant read the applicant's letter of request into record and showed photos of the boat house as it appears now and as it appeared 20+ years ago before it burned down. She noted that the new boat house is much smaller than the old one and explained the location of the new boathouse on the property according to the map on file with the application. Janet Hill, Zoning Enforcement Officer, spoke about properties around the lake, there are two lot types ones that are two pieces of property on either side of the state road and ones that are all one piece but divided by the state road. When the Sarjeant's applied to her for a Zoning Permit to construct the boat house she felt they didn't need a variance because they met the setback requirements from Tinker Hill Road. Ms. Hill was questioned about her decision and asked for legal advice. She was told that the applicant must meet set back requirements from the public road (West Shore Road in this case). The boat house as constructed now is 42' from West Shore Road and requires a variance. Mr. Owens asked who built the boathouse and if it could have been built on the concrete portion of the preexisting boat house or can be moved to be conforming? Ms. Sarjeant said that her husband Dean built the boat house 4' back from the original foundation so the building wouldn't be over the water and didn't obstruct their neighbor's view. She doesn't know if it can be moved and doesn't understand the problem. Mr. White informed Ms. Sarjeant that the Zoning Board of Appeals has been tough on building around the lake and explained the purpose of the Zoning Board of Appeals, the granting of variances and proof of hardship. Mr. Smith interjected referencing Zoning Regulation 12.1 that the location of the new boat house is better because it is away from the lake. At this point Mr. Smith and ZBA members discussed the property line on the lake shore and the question as to whether according to the map on file if in fact the Sarjeant's own the boat house. Mr. Owens wants to be sure that the ZBA has the right to regulate and rule on this matter. Members felt this matter should be continued to gain better information about the location of the boat house and the lake side property line. Ms. Sarjeant agreed but asked if the public hearing could be continued until May because the Sarjeants would not be in town for the April ZBA meeting. Ms. Sarjeant agreed to submit a written request asking that the public hearing be continued until May.
MOTION: to continue ZBA-0303, Request of Dean & Jane Sarjeant, 28 Tinker Hill Road/34 West Shore Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.6.1 (setback), to construct a boat house, was made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White excused himself from this hearing. Mr. Owens seated regular members Katharine Leab, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Bruce Skoog.
ZBA-0301, Request of Caroline & David Grubb, 4 Parsonage Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.5.1 (lot coverage), to construct a walkway. David Grubb was present as applicant and read his letter of request into record. Mr. Grubb believes the walkway puts the lot coverage over 15%. Ms. Leab asked if the walkway has already been built before a variance was granted. Mr. Grubb explained that Edmund White (his neighbor) notified him that a variance was required to construct the walkway, at the time the walkway was already under construction. Ms. Leab asked if the applicant had any proof that there used to be a walkway or if the walkway was removed to grant another variance. Mr. Grubb suggested that Mr. White remembers the old walkway. Pam Osborne, secretary for ZBA stated that there are no earlier files pertaining to variances for this property. Mr. Sedito asked if prior to building this walkway there was no walkway to the house. Mr. Grubb stated that there was not a walkway. Members asked for a detailed percentage of lot coverage of the property. The map provided with the application does not show the entire property or proportions for existing buildings, driveway, walkway etc. Members requested details on lot coverage and precise proportions for the lot coverage.
MOTION: to continue ZBA-0301, Request of Caroline & David Grubb, 4 Parsonage Lane, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 11.5.1 (lot coverage), to construct a walkway, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Roberts, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated regular members Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Polly Roberts, himself and alternate Bruce Skoog.
ZBA-0302, Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 12.1.3 (building within 200 feet of Bantam River), 17.4 (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for reconstruction of a dormitory/faculty apartment. Curt Smith, surveyor/engineer, and Rick Spooner, associate headmaster were present to represent this application. Mr. Smith began by explaining the location of the proposed reconstruction of Gros Cottage. He presented photos of the existing cottage and described the reconstruction process and site plan referencing plans on file with the application. Mr. Smith stated that they were seeking a variance because the building is within 200' of the Bantam River and they are adding a second story to the building. The new structure is being kept within the footprint of the old structure. Mr. Smith read a letter from Dorota Habib dated March 12, 2003 into the record. At present this cottage houses eight (8) students and one (1) faculty member. The reconstructed cottage will house the same number of students on the first floor with the faculty apartment being on the second floor. Because of the ADA building code they had to enlarge the bathroom facilities to accommodate a handicapped student, they also added one (1) bedroom to make all student rooms doubles (two were triples prior to reconstruction), this reduced the space for the faculty apartment, which is proposed to now be on the second floor. The total increase is stated to be 418 sq. feet. Mr. Smith informed members that they received Inland Wetland approval in January. Members understand the need for the bathrooms to be brought up to code, but asked about other considerations such as reducing the number of students in the building, keeping the cottage one story or other possible locations on school property. Members need to see an overall site plan of Rumsey Hall School and a comprehensive plan which includes enrollment and projected enrollment. Stephanie Fenwick, a resident of Romford Road read her letter in to the record.
MOTION: to continue ZBA-0302, Request of Rumsey Hall School, 201 Romford Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulation 12.1.3 (building within 200 feet of Bantam River), 17.4 (increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming structure), for reconstruction of a dormitory/faculty apartment, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Skoog, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts and himself.
ZBA-0304, Appeal by Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 328 Nettleton Hollow Road, of Zoning Enforcement Officer's 2/25/2003 denial of permit for second floor addition. Ira Bloom, Esq. was present to represent this appeal. Atty. Bloom began by stating that he felt the Zoning Enforcement Officer's decision was in error on three (3) grounds. Mr. Bloom feels the first error was based upon language in the Regulations. He feels that the property complies with regulations except for the front setback requirements but that within 17.4.a there is a window to allow an increase in nonconformity. Atty. Bloom feels that the window of tolerance is that going up doesn't add to the non conformity, and they are not enlarging the building into the front setback. He feels that the Zoning Enforcement Officer (ZEO) historically precluded any enlargement of a nonconforming structure and feels this is not what the regulations say. Secondly Mr. Bloom believes that the ZEO went against the advice of legal opinion. And lastly Atty. Bloom referenced Doyen v. Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Essex as a new development for the Zoning Board of Appeals to consider. Mr. White read into record a letter from Atty. Zizka dated March 19, 2003 in which Mr. Zizka strongly disagrees that the ZEO "did not follow the town council advice." At this point Janet Hill the Zoning Enforcement Officer also spoke to Atty. Bloom's comments that she didn't follow legal opinion. Ms. Hill read from Atty. Zizka letter of February 6th in which he stated "I recommend that you follow the historical approach" and "seek guidance from the Commission right away." Ms. Hill went on to state that she sought advice from town council and they both said to deny the application, if the ZBA should decide to uphold this appeal the message being sent to the ZEO is to second guest legal opinion and would set an unwise president for the town of Washington. Mr. White continued by stating that the Zoning Commission is in the process of amending Section 17.4 and changes are coming in the near future. Mr. White believes that Janet Hill has operated with consistency and hopes that commissions will not have to start reacting from potential fear of legal action. Atty. Bloom and members of ZBA went back and forth on the interpretation of Section 17.4. Mr. Bloom closed by stating that this is a modest application from his client who wants to keep the home where it is and to keep its historical nature in tact. Mr. White asked for comments from the public.
MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0304 Appeal by Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 328 Nettleton Hollow Road, of Zoning Enforcement Officer's 2/25/2003 denial of permit for second floor addition, was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Ms. Leab, by a 5-0 vote
MEETING
Ms. Leab felt that put with the commission's accretiative practices and Janet Hill's seeking of advice from both council and the zoning commission. This appeal should be turned down. Ms. Roberts feels the commission should support the ZEO, referencing the two (2) letters from council and the unanimous support of the zoning commission to turn down the application. Washington has a very strong precedent of how they view increase in volume. Mr. Sedito agreed with Ms. Leab and Ms. Roberts he felt Ms. Hill did everything reasonably possible. Mr. Owens feels Janet is diligent, he agrees with her actions and interpretations. Mr. White agrees with the other members and thinks Janet acted correctly.
MOTION: to deny ZBA-0304 Appeal by Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 328 Nettleton Hollow Road, of Zoning Enforcement Officer's 2/25/2003 denial of permit for second floor addition, by a 5-0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. White seated Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts and himself.
ZBA-0305, Request of Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 328 Nettleton Hollow Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6 (setback), to construct a second floor addition to an existing residence. Ira Bloom Esq. was present to represent Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee for Scott Rudin, property located at 328 Nettleton Hollow Road. Mr. Bloom stated for the record that he does not feel a variance is needed but is proceeding with a variance. They want to construct a second floor addition that would consist of a master bedroom and bath adding about 450 sq. feet. Ms. Hill interrupted by stating that this variance should include 17.4.a increasing the non conformity of a non conforming structure. Atty. Bloom made the modification to the application. At this point Mr. Rudin came forward to explain the second floor addition. They will be building on top of the existing structure. The point was to try to make the "added on portion" of the house more historically true. Other bedrooms are on the second floor, the safety issue of having visiting nieces & nephews unsupervised. The master bedroom is now located on the first floor. Atty. Bloom referenced the topography of the area there is a large tree in the rear of the house, the well and paved driveway are on the other side, the property has steep slopes up behind the house. He feels there is classic hardship in the topography of the land. Mr. Owens sympathizes with people who own houses like this one provided the applicant demonstrate that it is a reasonable adaptation of the house and can the need be justified. Mr. Rudin answered that he expects to move into this house and needs to create work space, have safety for the visiting children, and would like to finish off the 1960's addition. Restore the house to what it was, finish it right. Atty. Bloom stated that the house is a legal non conforming structure within the front setback requirements (located 25' from the street line, 15' from the property line), on a 5.01 acre parcel. This along with the topography is a true hardship according to Mr. Bloom. Atty. Bloom cited legal cases included in his letter. Mr. Bloom mentioned that at a later date the three (3) lots will become two (2) lots. Atty. Bloom added to the record a letter from Jean Pierre Delbecq dated March 17th in support of Mr. Rudin's request. John Morsan of Rock Creek Corporation was present and stated for the record that he felt this would be a fine addition and had no problem with it. Mr. Owens asked about the state of completion. They are in the final stages and will be finished in April. If they receive a variance completion will be in September. Mr. White asked if members needed a site visit, they didn't feel a site visit was necessary. Mr. White asked for further questions or comments from the public.
MOTION: to close the Public Hearing Re: ZBA-0305 Request of Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 328 Nettleton Hollow Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6 (setback), to construct a second floor addition to an existing residence, was made by Ms. Leab, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.
MEETING
Ms. Roberts favors granting this variance and understands a hardship. It defers best to the house by completing the extension. Ms. Roberts questioned the call to add 17.4.a. Mr. White reference 17.4 and special exceptions and questioned hardship. Ms. Leab understands the physical hardship. Historically and architecturally this proposal makes sense. Much less objection to this application than the first one. Mr. Sedito feels it is a reasonable request. Mr. Owens is sympathetic to the houses need to grow, does the land position constitute a hardship.
MOTION: to approve ZBA-0305 Request of Arnold J. Herrmann, Trustee, 328 Nettleton Hollow Road, for a variance from Zoning Regulations 11.6 (setback)and 17.4.a (increasing the non conformity of a non conforming building), to construct a second floor addition to an existing residence by a 4-1 vote.
Ms. Leab, Mr. Owens, Mr. Sedito and Ms. Roberts voted to approve
Mr. White voted to deny.
MOTION: to accept the minutes of the February 20, 2003 meeting as submitted, was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.
OTHER BUSINESS
Members were given a memo from Janet Hill about the final draft of revisions to Zoning Regulations 17.4, 18.1.4 and 18.2.1. Members were quite concerned with the changes to 17.4. Mr. White will communicate Zebra's concerns to Ms. Hill.
ZBA has received a copy of Mr. Herrmann motion to withdraw his appeal.
The Conservation Commission is looking for a volunteer for two subcommittees it has formed, a data management and land use pamphlet subcommittee.
MOTION: to adjourn was made by Ms. Roberts, seconded by Mr. Owens, by a 5-0 vote.
Submitted subject to approval,
Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary
February 20, 2003
Members Present: Edmund White, Chairman, Katharine Leab, Reese Owens, Bradford Sedito, Polly Roberts
Alternates Present: Georgia Middlebrook, Bruce SkoogThe Chairman opened the meeting at 7:30pm.
No alternates were seated.
MOTION: to accept the minutes of the December 12, 2002 meeting as submitted was made by Ms. Roberts and seconded by Mr. Sedito, by a 5-0 vote.
Mr. White read letters from James G. Kelly (dated 2/10/2003) and Ira W. Bloom (dated 1/27/2003) regarding Hermann, Trustee v. Washington ZBA-CV 03 0089269 S and their intention to withdraw that appeal.
Members were given copies of proposed changes to Zoning Regulations Section 17.4 and discussion ensued. Mr. White asked members to forward comments and concerns to him by February 28th.
The revised ZBA applications needs to be reviewed by an attorney - Mr. White will take care of forwarding it to Mike Zizka.
Mr. Owens and Mr. White discussed putting together their notes from the fall 2002 meeting they had with zoning members on lot coverage. These notes will be circulated to ZBA members.
MOTION: to adjourn was made by Mr. Sedito, seconded by Mr. Owens, by a 5-0 vote at 8:24pm.
Submitted subject to approval,
Pamela L. Osborne, Secretary
Meetings in 2002