CITY OF NORWALK ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS (approved June 4, 2015) PRESENT: STAFF: OTHERS: Taylor Strubinger, Chair; Joe Beggan; Keith Lyon; Lee Levey; Nadine Campbell; Juanita Olguin Aline Rochefort; Vladimir Mariano Atty Liz Suchy; Arpita Muchhal; Peter Micale; Bret Holzwarth; Terrence Meck; Francis Nash; Lee Combis; Tomasz Florczyk; Atty John Kennelly; Atty Frank Zullo; Steve Doherty; John Rich; Atty John Ryan I. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Strubinger called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. II. ROLL CALL After the meeting was called to order, Mr. Strubinger then read the rules of how the public hearings would be conducted. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 15-0507-01- Greenwich Flyers LLC Variance of front setback, parking, & coverage for construction of a replacement single family residence in a B residence zone. Property located at 21 Rocky Point Rd. Mr. Strubinger opened the public hearing. memo into Mr. Beggan read the legal Atty Suchy began the presentation by introducing the project team and handing in the certified, return receipt cards which evidenced notification of the public hearing. She oriented the commissioners as to the location of the property on an aerial map. She gave a brief history of Bell Island. She showed the commissioners photos of the house that had been taken during the week. She said that her client, the applicant, had wanted to keep the house in the current footprint, although the regulations required that it be moved back, further onto the property. The public was invited to see the site plans, etc. which were facing the commissioners. She then described the project which, the applicant said would have been a renovation. After a review of the foundation and the cost of the renovation, it was deemed necessary to demolish the structure. She then described the application. She then told the commissioners that the applicant had met with the neighbors to discuss what they wanted to do. They had letters of support Page 1 of 7
from some neighbors. She also said that if they received their variances, they would then file applications to the Zoning Commission to continue the project for CAM review. Arpita Muchhal, the designer on the project, continued the presentation. She went over the plans of the house. She described how they realized that they should demolish the structure, instead of renovate. She also described the rooms in the house. She said they also made sure that none of the bedrooms looked into neighboring houses bedrooms especially because the lots were small. Brett Holzwarth, from Redniss & Mead, the engineer on the project, continued the presentation. He began by discussing the drainage on the property. He said there would be no adverse impacts on the property and they were maintaining the same use. Terrence Meck, the applicant, continued the presentation. He gave a brief history of the property he stated the house dated back to the 1880 s. He explained that he has renovated many historical buildings. They had not wanted to demolish but as the cost escalated, they had to reconsider. No one spoke in support of the application. There were 3 letters written which were read into Mr. Nash spoke in opposition to the variance and requested that the application be tabled until concerns of the Bell Island Board and the applicant could be determined. There were concerns about liability and the closure of the Rocky Point Park and cleanup of the park. He proposed that the proposed house be moved closer to the water and conform to the setbacks. There was a discussion about how to demolish the building since the lot is small. He thought this would help to reduce the number of variances. The Board reiterated to the opposing party that the ZBA cannot mandate insurance conditions or access; that is a negotiation between the Bell Island Corp. and the applicant. Mr. Meck spoke in rebuttal to the opposition to the application. He explained that after discussion with his neighbors, they would not want the house to be moved back. It would obstruct their views of the water. He also explained that if the house was moved back, it would be in a high velocity zone which insurance companies will not insure. He also believed that the board members were concerned that they would not be able to use the park access during the summer. Mr. Meck said this could be a possibility but that he would like to start construction on the house since he has owned the property for many months. Accommodations would be made around July 4 th so that the Park could be accessed then. Mr. Strubinger closed the public hearing. B. 15-0507-02 Lucy Combis Variance of required front setback for front porch and garage expansion in A Residence zone. Property located at 10 Eugene Drive. Page 2 of 7
Mr. Strubinger opened the public hearing. Mr. Beggan read the legal memo into Lee Combis, Lucy Combis husband, began the presentation with a brief history of the property. He also handed in the certified, return receipt cards which evidenced notification of the public hearing. There was a discussion about the hardship and whether he had consulted the state statute as to what it meant. He also showed the commissioners pictures of the house as well as handing in letters of support. The letters were read into There was a discussion about the size of the front porch. Mr. Combis said that he had not met with staff about the size of the porch. No one spoke in support or in opposition to the application. closed the public hearing. Mr. Strubinger C. 15-0507-03 Tomasz R Florczyk & Magdelena J Wachel-Florczyk Variance of front setback for proposed front entry portico in A Residence zone. Property located at 11 Jean Ave. Mr. Strubinger opened the public hearing. Mr. Beggan read the legal memo into Mr. Florczyk began the presentation by giving a brief history of the property and explain what the project was. He said the current front porch was bigger than he was proposing to build. There was a discussion about the hardship. He was asked whether he knew about the issues when he bought the house or whether he had met with staff to discuss the application. One of the neighbors, at 9 Jean Avenue, spoke in support of the application. He said it would help property values in the neighborhood. No one spoke in opposition to the application. Mr. Strubinger closed the public hearing. D. 15-0507-04 - Jostal Corporation/Lamar Outdoor Advertising Variance to erect a billboard above the allowable height and a variance of dimensions of the billboard in a Business No. 1 Zone. Property located at 385 Connecticut Avenue. Mr. Strubinger opened the public hearing. Mr. Beggan read the legal memo into Atty Kennelly began the presentation by handing in the certified, return receipt cards which evidenced notification of the public hearing. He then handed the commissioners photos which showed the test that was used to see what the billboard would look like by raising a flag in the air. He said that they did not believe they needed Page 3 of 7
to chop down trees if the variance were granted. He thought that Norwalk s own regulations were the hardship. He also noted that many cities, including Norwalk, were setting limits on the amount of billboards as well as moving them closer to the highways. Some of the commissioners thought that this application might be better suited for the Zoning Commission as it relates to the size of the billboard. The height regulations have been in place since 1993. Atty Kennelly gave a description of the definition of offsite and on-site signs. He also said that a strict interpretation of the regulations was a hardship for the applicant. There was a discussion about changing the sign regulations to allow them to be placed nearer the highway. There was also a discussion whether there had previously been a billboard at this location but there had not. No one spoke in support or in opposition to the application. closed the public hearing. Mr. Strubinger E. 15-0507-05 Norwalk Medical Center LLC - Variance from centerline of Connecticut Ave. for proposed medical office building in Business No. 1 Zone. Property located at 71-75 Connecticut Ave. Mr. Strubinger opened the public hearing. Mr. Beggan read the legal memo into Atty Zullo began the presentation by introducing the project team and then orienting the commissioners as to the location of the property on an aerial map. He also gave a brief history of nearby projects, including the Norwalk Fire Headquarters, which had requested a similar variance in this application. He discussed letters of support which the commissioners had previously received. He also explained that if the city s regulations were followed, this would be a hardship. He then showed the commissioners an aerial map of Connecticut Avenue which showed buildings on it that were granted variances from the centerline of Connecticut Avenue. Steve Doherty, the architect on the project, continued the presentation by showing the plans of the proposed building. There was a discussion about the location of the building on the site. John Rich, the engineer on the project, explained why the proposed building was located where it was. Mr. Doherty went over the landscaping plan. Atty Zullo concluded his remarks. Letters of support were read into No one spoke in support of the application. Atty Kennelly spoke in opposition to the application by speaking on behalf of his clients, who hold a leasehold interest of 69 Connecticut Avenue. He said that he had not heard a hardship being requested. He said that none of the applicant s arguments constituted a hardship Atty John Ryan, who represented the owners of 69 Connecticut Avenue, also spoke in opposition to the application. He explained that a long, narrow lot did not automatically qualify as a hardship. He discussed several court cases as part of his Page 4 of 7
presentation. He then explained that they could build a long and narrow building.there was a discussion about the possibility of Connecticut Ave. being widened. He said that his clients were concerned about traffic. Atty Zullo spoke in rebuttal to the opposition. He believed that there were other reasons that these 2 attorneys were opposing the application. He also said that the staff had encouraged them to make the building conform to regulations. He also addressed the comments about Connecticut Avenue being widened. No one else spoke in support or in opposition to the application. Mr. Strubinger closed the public hearing. IV. BOARD ACTION ON A thru E Before the deliberations started, it was decided that Mr. Levey would be voting as the alternate. A. 15-0507-05 Norwalk Medical Center LLC - Variance from centerline of Connecticut Ave. for proposed medical office building in Business No. 1 Zone. Property located at 71-75 Connecticut Ave. MR. STRUBINGER MOVED: that the variance be GRANTED due to the fact that the hardship is the topography of the site and the narrow configuration of the lot. Page 5 of 7 Mr. Beggan seconded. MR. STRUBINGER AMENDED THE MOTION: by stating that the landscaping be coordinated with the Zoning Department staff as a condition. Mr. Beggan seconded. B. 15-0507-04 - Jostal Corporation/Lamar Outdoor Advertising Variance to erect a billboard above the allowable height and a variance of dimensions of the billboard in a Business No. 1 Zone. Property located at 385 Connecticut Avenue. MR. STRUBINGER MOVED: that the variances requested be DENIED because a hardship, in the opinion of the, has not been indicated.
Mr. Beggan seconded. C. 15-0507-03 Tomasz R Florczyk & Magdelena J Wachel-Florczyk Variance of front setback for proposed front entry portico in A Residence zone. Property located at 11 Jean Ave. MR. STRUBINGER MOVED: that the variance be GRANTED. The hardship is due to the house was originaly constructed in 1950. The house is in front of the setback line. Mr. Lyons seconded. D. 15-0507-02 Lucy Combis Variance of required front setback for front porch and garage expansion in A Residence zone. Property located at 10 Eugene Drive. MR. STRUBINGER MOVED: that the variance be GRANTED because the hardship is the error in that the structure was built in front of the setback line. Mr. Lyons seconded. E. 15-0507-01- Greenwich Flyers LLC Variance of front setback, parking, & coverage for construction of a replacement single family residence in a B residence zone. Property located at 21 Rocky Point Rd. MR. STRUBINGER MOVED: that the variances for front setback, parking and coverage be GRANTED because the applicant had shown a hardship in the lot size and by constructing a new residence that reduced the number of non-conformities. Mr. Levey seconded. Page 6 of 7
V. ACTION ON HEARING MINUTES April 9, 2015 VI. Ms. Olguin left the meeting at this time. MR. STRUBINGER MOVED: that the minutes be accepted as presented. Mr. Beggan seconded. Mr. Strubinger, Mr. Beggan, Ms. Campbell No one opposed. Mr. Lyon and Mr. Levely abstained. VI. ADJOURNMENT MR. STRUBINGER made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Lyon seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 10:22 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Diana Palmentiero Page 7 of 7