Westport Zoning Board of Appeals members said tonight they believe the owners of 113 Cross Highway are using the wrong method to gain approvals to preserve the structures on the property, site of the town’s first gas station.
113 Cross Highway before preservation work began. (CLICK TO ENLARGE) Dave Matlow/WN file photo
Michael and Kim Ronemus are seeking variances to be able to use an old garage and barn as an office and guest house, which are not allowed under the zoning regulations in accessory buildings. The house was designated as historical by the Representative Town Meeting last December, which prevents its destruction (See WestportNow Dec. 5)
Peter Gelderman, who is representing the Ronemuses, said the historic nature of the property and trying to preserve it presents a hardship. A hardship is required in order for the board of appeals to grant a variance, or waiver from the town’s zoning regulations.
“They are trying to do something that otherwise would be allowed if they were not in accessory buildings,” he said. “It would be easier and cheaper for them to take them down and build an addition on the house or just tear it down and start over. They want to try to preserve the buildings.”
The Ronemus will spend $800,000 to preserve and renovate the buildings, he said.
Planning and Zoning Director Laurence Bradley said there are alternatives to a variance in order to preserve the property’s historical structures by going to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
One would be to change the nonconforming use of the property, he said, and the other would be to change the historic overlay zone regulation in order to allow accessory buildings to house things like a home office or a guest room.
ZBA Chairman James Ezzes said he thinks the Ronemus are going about their plans the wrong way and they should go for the regulation change.
James Ezzes: “You’re working with the wrong board.” Dave Matlow/WN file photo
“You’re working with the wrong board,” he said. “I see people wearing ‘Save the Cross Highway Garage’ buttons, and all five of us would do it if we could.”
There are historical homes being destroyed all over town, he said, and the board is sensitive to the issues, but they are also concerned about the precedent approving the variances could set.
The couple should work with the Historic District Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission to create a mechanism to preserve the buildings, Ezzes said.
Gelderman said there are no current regulations to help preserve the property, and a text change to the regulations would take too long.
They were told it would take six months to one year, he said, in order to have quality changes made.
“You’re assuming my clients can hang in for an indefinite amount of time,” he said.
Kim Ronemus said the couple has been overwhelmed by the support from the community in preserving the house and never aspired to be in the position they are today.
“Those buildings are bursting with stories,” she said. “I tried to think of how we could use them.”
Every person they worked with kept telling the couple it was cheaper to tear down the buildings and town officials would never allow them to do what they were proposing, she said.
Everyone’s encouragement has helped push them forward, she said.
Michael Ronemus said the couple does not plan to take their proposal further.
“We don’t have the time or the means to go through P&Z,” he said. “We didn’t want this to be adversarial.”
I think your last quote is off. What Michael Ronemus said was that if the board votes against the plan, they DO NOT plan to appeal the decision. This means, basically, bye-bye 113 Cross Highway as we might know it. The property owners will not be able to make use of this beautiful complex, and the place becomes history in a much less desireable sense of the word.
I was in Town Hall through most of last night’s meeting and saw much of the rest on Channel 79. As a citizen, interested observer & supporter of the Ronemus’ project, I find myself utterly perplexed that the ZBA seemed so resistant to acting in support of the variance proposals. I don’t profess to know all that much about the rules & regs of town govt, but it does seem to me that if there is any legislative body in the town that can approve what the proposal, it’s them. It’s certainly true that the P&Z should be creating or considering some zoning amendments so that projects like these, which preserve town history (to say nothing of the aesthetics involved) can go through more quickly and with less complexity.
But, in the meantime, such changes are not in play, and in this case one would think (I certainly thought) that this would be the right town board to assist in ensuring that this property can be restored and preserved.
There were many extremely articulate speakers last night, points were raised from both procedural and emotional perspectives, and not a single objection was raised by neighbors and townspeople to implementation of this project, so I fail to understand in whose interests this Board is acting. Presumably the town’s, but in this case it’s hard to see the positive connection.
As I said last night at the meeting, Kim and I did not want this issue to become adversarial or controversial. We are merely trying to preserve a house that is nearly 200 years old and restore the buildings and property so that it can hopefully last another 200 or so years.
The outpouring of support from people in town has been amazing and it speaks loudly about the feelings of the town regarding the destruction of the historic homes. We deeply appreciate all of the support and encouragement we have received. We also know that the ZBA is aware of the suppot we have and the emotional appeal of historic preservation.
We recognize that our requests are out of the norm for the ZBA. We also recognize that ZBA members are volunteers and as I stated last night we appreciate their dedication to Westport working as volunteers on the board.
If the ZBA has the power to grant our requests we certainly hope that they will do so. Our attorney has presented legal precedent which he feels supports our application. If ZBA denies the variances, I trust it is not because they want to see another historical structure demolished, but it is because the current town laws do not support what we are trying to do.
Mr. Ezzes suggested that rather than direct our request to the ZBA we work with the P and Z to change the laws. In fact we discussed this with our attorney, Mr. Gelderman, and did not feel that applying to change the law was the appropriate procedure or that there was any guarantee of success. We were also told that others had attempted to obtain text changes in the town laws and were denied. Finally we were told that it would take a much longer time that through the ZBA. It is our understanding that the ZBA has discretion to permit variances and that is why we pursued our application with this board.
If we cannot restore the buildings, then as much as we would love to preserve this proud old house, we could not afford to do so.
If the town does not have laws that allow preservation in this situation, then unfortunately we will continue to see the loss of historic houses.
As I said last night, we do not have the time or money to pursue a change in the town laws to make preservation of historic houses more feasible. We cannot and will not pursue that route. I also said that we will not appeal the ZBA decision if they deny the variances. Again, we do not have the time or money to do that. So if they deny our request, we will place the property back on the market and it is unlikely that it will be preserved unless there is someone else out there who wants to fight the fight.
We have taken every possible step that we know of and followed the law in our attempt to preserve the house and the other buildings on the property. With the support and understanding of everyone, including the ZBA, we are optimistic. And if we fail, then Kim and I know that we did everything possible to save the house.
Michael Ronemus
Jennifer Connic in her article unfortunately gave a very unbalanced view of the meeting, and the story headline gives the ZBA far more credit than it deserved. I would have called it