Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/07/2003

Home

Z.B. July 25, 2003 -- page 5 was in a marine commercial distr/ct, and the marina existed prior to the enact- ment of any zoning regulations. tn 1983, the town ~anted the owner's predecessor a var/anco permitting a reduction in rear yard setback from the required 50 feet to 6 feet. The variance also increased the floor area ratio. At that time, the predecessor intended to construct one building for boat repairs and storage. In 1997, the zoning comm/ssion approved a site plan and issued a special permit for the construction of the building. In January 2000, the zoning enforcement officer conducted an inspection of the property and noticed several storage sheds within 8 feet. of the property line that had been erected, he believed, in, violation of the 50-foot setback re- quirement. The structures included large containers and were stacked to pro- vide storage of boats and equipment. The containers could be moved from place to place, thus, they did not appear on the site plan. The zoning enforcement officer gave notice of the violations and issued a cease and desist order. The current owner was unaware of the 1983 variance and filed a site plan to modify the 1997 special use permit that would allow temporary steel storage containers. The commission denied the application because the allowable floor area ratio was exceeded and the containers ex/sted witkin the setback area. The owner appealed to the lower court. The court found for the owner, deciding that the floor area ratio was not exceeded and the 1983 variance had reduced the setback to 6 feet. Finally, the court decided the containers were nonconforming buildings under the existing statute. The commission appealed, contending the court improperly decided that the 1983 variance reduced the rear yard setback requ/xement to 6 feet. DECISION: Affirmed. There were no limitations imposed on the 1983 variance. Further, the vari- ance was issued at a time when the predecessor apparently intended to con- struct just one building. However, the variance contained no limitation as to the number of buildings or to the proposed building as shown on the site plan or to a particular part of the premises. Thus, the rear setback was reduced down to 6 feet when the 1983 variance was issued. Citation: Dodson Boary. ard LLC v. Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Storzingron, Appellate Court of Connecticut, No. AC22931 (2003). see also.' L & G Associarex Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 673 A.2d ]146 (]996). Single-Family Housing -- Owner fined for having no housing license Owner claimed no proper notice of violations DISTRICT OF COLUMBL* (6/13/03) -- In 1999, Walsh owned a 10-bedroom house, w,hich he rented to eight re 10 students attending a nearby university,. 105