Stonington — A Zoning Board of Appeals hearing Tuesday on a variance request to renovate a dilapidated downtown Pawcatuck building became a broader argument about the board’s authority and included attacks on the character of the property owner.

The building, located at 6 Mechanic Street, was purchased in 2018 by Jim Lathrop and has been in disrepair since a 2017 fire.

An initial permit for renovations was issued in 2019, but renovations were not completed before the permit expired. In September, Lathrop cited the onset of winter, followed by labor shortages due to the Covid-19 pandemic, for the delay.

Lathrop submitted a second permit application in April, which was denied in June because the required structural work exceeded the substantial improvement threshold.

Town zoning regulations state that if renovations cost more than 50% of the value of the building, they are considered substantial, and Federal Emergency Management Agency regulations apply.

FEMA requires entrances to be one foot higher than flood grade — which is 10 feet on Mechanic Street — must be met. The building in question is currently at 6 feet above flood grade with a sidewalk level entrance.

Documents associated with the initial permit show the value of the building to be $61,600, and estimated the cost of materials and labor to be $30,150, just shy of the 50% threshold of $30,800.

Lathrop had submitted an application for a variance in order to make renovations without complying with FEMA regulations.

In his brief, Lathrop’s attorney Ted Ladwig wrote that without the requested variance, the lot would be unusable due to its small size of just 871 square feet. He said compliance would cause hardship, in part due to the fact that the building shares a common wall with the neighboring building.

Ben Tamsky, former Planning and Zoning Commission chairman, spoke in opposition to the variance application, stating he did not believe the ZBA had the authority to grant the variance based on town regulations and state statutes.

He argued that all the properties in the zoning district are below flood elevation, and as such, 6 Mechanic St. is not eligible because the statute only allows variances for reasons unique to the property under consideration.

John Prue, former selectman and Planning and Zoning Commission chairman, made a similar argument, which elicited a tense back and forth between Prue and board members.

Prue challenged a stipulation that, if the application was approved, failure of the property owner to complete work within one year of receiving the board’s approval would result in retroactive blight fines of $53,100.

“This board is absolutely powerless.You have absolutely no authority to enter into a blight contract with the property owner,” he said.

Prue further argued that the PZC had improperly vested power in the ZBA, which is governed by state statutes.

Commission member Mark Mitsko said, “I get your point, but that has nothing to do with us,” and added, “It’s nothing to do with why we’re here tonight. We’re spending all kinds of time doing nothing.”

Member J. Jeffrey Walker asked Prue, “What’s your issue here?”

FEMA rating at risk

Prue responded that granting the variance would decrease the town’s rating with the FEMA, ultimately increasing flood insurance rates for residents,.

“This is conveying a benefit to one property owner at the expense of everyone else,” he said.

Town Zoning Enforcement Officer Candace Palmer stated that granting the variance would not increase rates for residents, and that FEMA was aware that flood zone variances were permitted under town ordinances when the town locked in rates for five years this summer.

Laura Graham, a Stonington resident, said she wanted to see the property cleaned up and agreed with Prue’s statements. She further stated she had concerns about Lathrop’s character. She said, speaking from her own experiences with Lathrop as an Economic Development Commission member, “I find that he is antagonistic with the community. I feel that he works, often, in what appears to be self-interest, in my opinion.”

Attorney Ladwig rebutted Prue’s and Tamsky’s assertion that state statute did not allow the ZBA to approve the variance because the shared wall between 6 Mechanic St. and 4 Mechanic St. is what makes the situation unique — not the flood elevation as the two former PZC chairs had suggested.

Ladwig said that for Graham to characterize Lathrop’s motives “is grossly unfair and improper.” He said Lathrop was using his own money to increase property values for the downtown Pawcatuck area, and “he should not be pilloried for it; he should be congratulated for it.”

“Without the requested variance there is no use possible on the lot. It would be effectively condemned,” Ladwig said.

The board voted unanimously to continue the matter to the November meeting while seeking input from the town attorney regarding the ZBA’s authority to grant the variance.

Lathrop stated, “if the town wants to give me one year after the issuance of the building permit, the blight will be gone long before that one year.”