ESE MINUTES ARE PRESENTED IN DRAFT FORM AND HAVE NOT BEEN FORMALLY APPROVED BY THE ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISION. OFFICIAL COPIES OF MINUTES, WHEN APPROVED, CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE TOWN CLERK OR PLANNING OFFICE.
ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 18, 2010
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Thursday, February 18, 2010 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman Charles Duren called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Charles Duren, Chairman
Peter Falk
Charles Ladd
Nicles Lefakis
Lori Longhi
Kathleen Sarno
Ronald Gregory, Voting Alternate
ALSO PRESENT: José Giner, AICP, Director of Planning
FIRE EVACUATION ANNOUNCEMENT
Chairman Duren gave the fire evacuation announcement.
EXECUTIVE SESSION WITH TOWN ATTORNEY TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION MATTERS
Commissioner Falk made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Longhi, to go into Executive Session to discuss pending litigation. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote and the Commission went into Executive Session at 7:02 p.m. in the Enfield Room.
Commissioner Falk made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Gregory, to come out of Executive Session. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote and Executive Session ended at 7:30 p.m. Chairman Duren noted the discussion involved pending litigation and no votes were taken or decisions made.
MINUTES
a. February 4, 2010
Commissioner Falk made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lefakis, to approve the Minutes of February 4, 2010. Commissioner Ladd made a correction on page three, second paragraph. The fourth sentence should read: “Instead of having maximum height, have minimum height.” Commissioner Duren made a correction on page 4, last paragraph. “3 Rim Street” should read “229 North Maple Street.” The Minutes, as amended, were approved by a 5 – 0 – 2 vote. Commissioners Longhi and Sarno abstained.
STAFF COMMENTS
a. Director of Planning
Mr. Giner stated the Commission has in their meeting packet an update on the clothing bins. He sent notices of violations to all properties that had clothing bins as well as to the two companies that were putting them out there. One of the more visible ones located on the corner of Main and Pleasant Streets in Thompsonville has been removed. This morning Roger Alsbaugh observed trucks going and removing some of the ones on Route 5. The one at the Fox Hill Gas Station has been removed. The one on South Road is still there. It looks like they are getting rid of them systematically. Mr. Giner will give them a couple more days and if they are still out there, they will be referred to the Town Attorney. Most of the owners of the property have called and stated they are trying to comply. They stated that the owners of the company told them the clothing bins were okay under zoning and they were surprised that they were not and wanted to cooperate with the town. They were not able to get a hold of the company, U. S. Gain. Mr. Giner did talk to someone at U. S. Gain and he told him he was going to start removing the clothing bins.
Mr. Giner was asked to put something in writing about the standard procedures for zoning enforcement. He noted the many emails that have been received which take up a lot of staff time because people don’t understand the process for zoning enforcement. Mr. Giner did some research and the Town Attorney’s Office is looking at the proposed standard procedures. The draft procedures he prepared were based on ones adopted by the Town of Wallingford’s Planning and Zoning Commission. It is a summary of what is done today and it will be a document that will help people understand what the steps are. The other part of it is to get a spread sheet or some other form where people will be able to go on to the town’s web page and find out what the status of a complaint is. Mr. Giner noted the town is developing a software system which will allow him to enter all this electronically. In the meantime, there can be a report on the town’s web page to state what is happening and the status of any zoning enforcement complaint. Mr. Giner stated there are many emails that are received and the staff is answering all of those. In one case, there were fifty emails on the same property.
Mr. Giner stated he will propose tools that will make it easier for zoning enforcement. One of those tools is the fines ordinance. This is one of the things Mr. Giner will be proposing. What he would like at some point is to have the Commission actually adopt these guidelines. He pointed out Appendix C which the town doesn’t do now. What happens when someone comes in and requests additional time beyond the ten days allowed? We don’t want to get strung along and have to start the process again. By doing a consent and abatement order, the person can sign and acknowledge that they are violating and have a certain amount of time to comply.
Chairman Duren stated a lot of people aren’t aware that they have to get a permit for a shed or a fence. They just order the shed and put it up. Mr. Giner discussed how a consent and abatement order can be helpful.
Commissioner Longhi would like to hear from Zoning Enforcement Officer Virginia Higley before the Commission acts on this just to see what her opinion is. She is the one who will be doing this. Mr. Giner stated she has a copy of it and her initial reaction was she likes this document. Commissioner Longhi noted it will impact the zoning enforcement officer the most and it would be good for her to give her opinion. Commissioner Longhi stated she would also like to read it in a little more detail. Mr. Giner stated this is not for tonight. The Town Attorney is reviewing it and the Zoning Enforcement Officer has reviewed it. It will be brought up at an upcoming meeting.
Chairman Duren suggested having a hearing on these standard procedures. Mr. Giner stated it is standard procedures according to what you can do by state statutes. He doesn’t know if a hearing is needed. There could be a public information meeting instead.
Commissioner Longhi stated she would hate to implement these standard procedures and not have the public aware of them.
Mr. Giner stated the procedures include what is done today except for the abatement order. We are limited to what we can do by state statutes. People will understand the process with these standard procedures. They often ask why can’t you go in there and get rid of whatever it is. The town can’t and there is a process that has to be followed to get compliance.
Mr. Giner stated the other thing they are thinking of doing is having an open telephone line which can be a violation line where people would be directed to call that line and leave a recorded message with their complaint. The Secretary could then check the line on a periodic basis during the day and write out the complaints for the Zoning Enforcement Officer to take a look at. Mr. Giner has been doing some enforcement and Mr. Alsbaugh has been out doing leg work with a camera. If there was a complaint line, people would know to call that number and they can leave a recorded message. If they chose to leave a number to get back to them, the staff could get back to them with an update or they could be directed to the web page to see the status of their complaint. This would free up the Zoning Enforcement Officer to actually do enforcement work. Mr. Giner stated any thoughts from the Commission would be welcome.
Mr. Giner stated he had talked to the Commission about temporary containers and the situation with the library where they have their annual drive for books and do not have a place to store the books. When he reviewed the storage container regulations, there really wasn’t anything that covered municipal uses. He provided some additional wording to the Commission to include in the regulations. Chairman Duren asked that Commissioners take home this wording and review it and that Mr. Giner include it on the next agenda.
Mr. Giner stated he received a letter from a gentleman concerning the former package store property on Taylor Road. He has been getting a lot of inquiries about this property. The area is zoned industrial and the building doesn’t fit in. He has been getting questions regarding the use of this building. He has told people it is industrial and the Commission changed its regulations to allow package stores in industrial zones. This was before Mr. Giner got here.
Chairman Duren stated the property has been a package store for years and then it was closed and later reopened.
Mr. Giner stated he has had inquiries about putting in a convenience store or a day care use. These uses are not allowed in Industrial under the current regulations. It would be a spot zone to just rezone it to Business General or Business Local.
Mr. Giner stated the store got separated from the main parcel and the question is what can that store be used for. It was designed as a store and it is in an industrial zone.
Chairman Duren stated the problem he has it there is so little industrially zoned land in town. Mr. Giner stated the parcel is a separate lot from the farm. It used to be all one parcel.
Chairman Duren stated the Commission has had proposals to change the zone up there. There was housing which was denied.
Mr. Giner stated the regulation allows package stores in industrial zones and it looks like this was done at the request of the property owner. It just fits that piece of property. He suggested repealing that section which would make that property nonconforming. They then could come in with a special use permit for alternate uses under that section that allows a change from one nonconforming use to another.
Commissioner Longhi asked if this property was recently purchased and did they know what the property was when they bought it. Mr. Giner stated he is sure the person that bought it understands what the uses are. He has been getting a lot of requests for different things and all of them don’t fit into an industrial zone.
Commissioner Sarno stated they remodeled the house on the corner. That is also zoned industrial but it was preexisting. Mr. Giner stated the house has always been a house even when the package store was there.
Mr. Giner stated the Commission has a letter with one proposal for the former package store. Commissioner Sarno asked how would those people next door in the house like living next to a store. Mr. Giner stated it is all one owner. It got split up from the farm. The package store and the house lot were taken as a first split.
Commissioner Longhi stated she is not inclined to approve the change but she doesn’t know about the rest of the Commission.
Commissioner Sarno noted the houses across the street and she questioned how happy they would be with a retail use.
Some discussion followed about other convenience stores in the area.
Mr. Giner stated the property is zoned industrial and it could be a contractors’ yard.
Commissioner Sarno stated she is not really in favor of spot zoning.
Mr. Giner stated the question is how to allow alternate uses. He noted the Commission doesn’t want to open up industrial zones to having convenience stores or retail. The zone does allow retail related to what is going on on the property.
Commissioner Ladd asked if we are going to discuss mixed use zoning. Perhaps we could change some of the uses for the industrial zone as well.
Commissioner Sarno stated the mixed use being discussed is retail on the bottom and apartments on top. Chairman Duren stated this was allowed in downtown Thompsonville. Commissioner Ladd stated the Commission could also discuss it for industrial areas as well.
Chairman Duren stated Commissioner Ladd can bring that up when the Commission discusses changing the zoning regulations.
Commissioner Longhi asked the size of the lot the package store is located on. Mr. Giner was not sure of the size.
Commissioner Sarno asked if they would want to change the zone from the corner of North Street to the end of that parcel.
Mr. Giner stated one of his thoughts was to remove package stores from industrial zones because it really doesn’t fit in. This would make the previous use nonconforming. They could then come in for a special permit to change from one nonconforming use to another and the Commission could look at it on a case by case basis.
Chairman Duren stated it had been a package store but it was closed for years. Then they came in and reopened it.
Mr. Giner stated it was a zone change to allow a package store to happen in an industrial zone. It was basically for this one parcel.
Commissioner Longhi stated it was basically for them. If they wanted to take down that building and do whatever, they could do that. They could knock down the package store and do whatever fits in the zone.
Commissioner Gregory stated there are actually about four lots there. The potato barn has been taken apart. There is another shed that is right next to where the package store was. It is perpendicular to the road. The potato barn was parallel to the road. The other barn is probably thirty-five or forty feet from where the package store was.
Commissioner Ladd stated right now there are a lot more offensive uses that would be legal on this property rather than a convenience store.
Commissioner Longhi stated that would be proper for the zone. She is not in favor of changing it.
Mr. Giner stated he will get back to the person that inquired stating there is no consensus from the Commission on what he wants to do. Mr. Giner stated he has been getting calls for this property on a weekly basis. One call was about putting in a day care center. The answer is no because it is not permitted in an industrial zone.
Mr. Giner stated people know the property is available for rent. Commissioner Sarno asked how people know the property is available for rent. Mr. Giner didn’t know but he has been getting calls about the property so someone is actively marketing it. Commissioner Gregory stated there are no signs out there. He lives three houses away.
Commissioner Lefakis questioned if this would be a unique parcel because there was a home and a business on this property when it was zoned industrial. In his mind, that seems a little different than if you have one big parcel that is industrial and someone comes along and says I would like to build a house or a package store. Because the uses were preexisting, it would make some sense to try to find an avenue.
Mr. Giner stated you would have to put conditions on how it would operate across from a residential neighborhood.
Chairman Duren stated the package store was considered abandoned. Mr. Giner stated before the latest opening yes. Chairman Duren asked how many years does it have to be before it is considered abandoned. Mr. Giner stated the state courts have said that the passage of time alone does not consider a property abandoned. You have to put something into an interim conforming use to actually show an intent to abandon. Chairman Duren stated he remembered the Commission had that concerning some gas stations and the question was when are they abandoned. Mr. Giner stated there used to be something in the regulations that stated after three years of not being used but then the State Supreme Court threw those types of regulations out. Chairman Duren stated he has driven by the package store when it was closed and all the equipment seemed to be inside. They never really cleaned it out. You can always ask Mr. Schlatz because he had to replace a lot of it. Chairman Duren questioned whether the use is abandoned.
Mr. Giner stated it is conforming as a package store and they can reopen as a package store. That is the only thing they can put in there that is retail oriented.
Commissioner Sarno asked if they would be able to put in a package store with the school being right there. Mr. Giner stated they came in at the time and got a special use permit. The school was there when they came in for the special use permit.
Commissioner Longhi stated if they recently bought this property they have to be an informed buyer. They had to know what the zone was. They knew what the house was. They fixed up the house. Now they are looking to expand and they are looking at other ways of capitalizing on their investment. But they knew going in what the zone was and that it was industrial. They knew they could have a package store. If it had been in existence for twenty years, Commissioner Longhi understands what Commissioner Lefakis is saying and all of a sudden things were different. But they recently bought this property knowing this.
Commissioner Sarno confirmed it is a recent sale.
Mr. Giner stated he got a letter and he will explain to the letter writer what the consensus of the Commission is. The only thing it can be used for is what the regulations state.
Commissioner Longhi was asking about the size of the lot and if it’s a large industrial piece. It’s not like it’s a small lot that is going to be hard to use for an industrial use. That is more of a hardship. If it’s a tiny little lot and you have an industrial lot, there are limited things that you can do. That would make more reason to do something than if it was a larger lot and you have multiple choices.
Mr. Giner stated it meets the minimum lot size for an industrial zone. Even with the first lot split, they would be able to do it. The farm is the bigger parcel. Chairman Duren stated some of it he sold off across the street where the houses are.
Commissioner Gregory stated he knows that where the property line ends on North Street the property is approximately 200’ deep.
Mr. Giner stated he will get more information for the Commission. In the meantime he will inform the writer there is no consensus from the Commission. He can talk with Ray.
Commissioner Gregory stated he sold it as a sizeable piece of property and it went all the way up past where the potato barn was. When he plowed and mowed on this property, he only went so far and the rest was not cut. It is probably 200’ deep on North Street and then it goes 250’ north on Taylor Road.
Mr. Giner stated the Annual Meeting of the Connecticut Federation of Planning and Zoning Agencies is March 18, 2010 and he reminded Commissioners to let him know if they want to attend. He got responses from Commissioners Longi, Falk and Dumont. Commissioner Ballard may attend. Commissioner Gregory stated he would like to attend.
CORRESPONDENCE
Chairman Duren stated the Commission has on the desk tonight the Connecticut Federation of Planning and Zoning Agencies quarter newsletter and the Planning magazine. There are summaries of zoning requests to CRCOG. There are several letters regarding the clothing bins. Correspondence also includes the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Notice of Action dated February 2, 2010, and letters regarding Wetlands Permit #IW-533 and #IW453.05.
COMMISSIONERS’ CORRESPONDENCE
Commissioner Longhi thanked Chairman Duren for bringing some questions forward for her at the last meeting. She does appreciate that.
Chairman Duren stated the Commission has been working on the Gateway and some things up there are getting pretty sloppy. The used car dealer that is located there is parking on the grass between the sidewalk and the street. He has more cars. He instructed Ginny to talk to the Fire Marshal because if there is ever a fire up there, they will not be able to get near those buildings. Commissioner Sarno asked why can’t we tow the cars because he is constantly violating. Chairman Duren stated they could cancel his insurance. It is a safety hazard at the present time.
Commissioner Sarno stated the owner knows how many cars he can have there.
Chairman Duren stated the other thing is the old Arco station. He has his vehicles back on the lawn up against Taylor Rental. He has more cars than he is supposed to have and he is parking them on the grass. He also had clothing bins. Mr. Giner stated he was one of the first ones to call to say the bins would be removed.
Chairman Duren stated that Stickley furniture company parks two trailers in the front and he questioned why can’t they park them around the back. Mr. Giner will double check on this as he thinks Ginny did something a while back. Chairman Duren stated the Commission asked about the signs before when they weren’t using the building. He stated the Commission has been addressing the gateway and the first things you hit when you come into town are these places. Mr. Giner will double check. He noted they owe the Commission a zoning enforcement officer report. Chairman Duren stated the Fire Marshal should be involved where those cars are. He has asked about this previously and he hasn’t seen anything yet. Mr. Giner will get the Commission a report for the next meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. PH#2691 – Special Use Permit for grocery beer license at an existing convenience store located at 565 Enfield Street in a Business Local (BL) District, Map 33, Lot 274, Shah Bakul, Applicant; Saloneel LLC, Owner.
Chairman Duren noted Ronald Gregory will be sitting in for the absent Commissioner.
Chairman Duren stated on the application the applicant’s address is listed as 583 Enfield Street. He doesn’t believe anyone lives at 583 Enfield Street. He asked that the applicant state his address for the Commission. Mr. Giner stated that is the unit address. Chairman Duren noted on the application it says applicant’s address and he has listed 583 Enfield Street. Mr. Bakul stated his address is 69 Shea Circle, Rocky Hill, Connecticut. Mr. Giner stated the store’s address is 583 and the property address is 565 Enfield Street.
Chairman Duren stated Mr. Giner did clarify that Mr. Bakul owns the property.
Commissioner Gregory stated on Exhibit 9 on page 2, there is a typographical error. It has one column which says 1,00’ and he believes that should be 1,000’. Mr. Giner agreed there is a zero missing.
Shah Bakul appeared before the Commission regarding this application. He stated he has run a convenience store at 583 Enfield Street for nine years. Currently the store next to his store is empty. He would have some more space to add product and he would like to add beer. What he would like to do is to add a cooler and counter. They already have a sales counter. They just have to move it to a different location.
Chairman Duren asked if the cooler for the sales is located at the left rear of the store. Mr. Bakul stated that cooler is existing. The cooler they have right now is for other products. Chairman Duren stated the beer cooler is on the right hand side and that is where the alcohol would be. The walk in cooler is for food. He asked on the right hand side, is that another building where a door is shown to the back parking lot next to the walk-in cooler. Mr. Bakul stated that door leads to the back of the store where they have an office and a utility room. Chairman Duren asked about another section and what it is used for. Mr. Bakul stated that is just an empty space for storage. There is a wall there. The storage space is not useable.
Commissioner Sarno asked if the door in the vicinity of the beer cooler is the door to the beer cooler. Mr. Bakul stated it is and he can swing the door out to get product. This is not a walk-in type of cooler.
Chairman Duren stated there is no certification that the signs were up. He believes he saw them. Mr. Giner state he has been out there and he does have an affidavit from Mr. Bakul. The signs were up for the proper amount of time. Mr. Bakul came in the Friday after the last meeting to make sure they got posted. Mr. Giner stated the affidavit gets submitted at the hearing.
Commissioner Longhi asked about the traffic items. She noted now we have this Exhibit 15.
Mr. Giner stated the applicant had applied for a full liquor license in 2008. At that time, they didn’t show up for the hearing and the Commission denied the application because they didn’t present their case. He sent a memo to Traffic Officer Santanella for comment. He sent back a memo stating he would like to see the curb cut closest to Montano Road blocked off because of the accident history at the property. Mr. Giner stated his proposed conditions at the time had that condition on there but the Commission never adopted that motion. Mr. Giner stated when this came in last week he sent an email to Sergeant Santanella for his comments. He responded on Tuesday stating that a three-year accident history at Route 5 and Montano Road shows 22 motor vehicle accidents, 13 of which are failure to grant the right of way as a contributing factor. At least ten of these involved curb cuts to Route 5 from this property. Mr. Giner revised his conditions to put back the same condition that was offered last time which is #2. that the curb cut nearest Montano Road be closed off by curbing per the Traffic Safety Officer’s recommendation. It is an open curb cut right at the light.
Commissioner Longhi stated what she was concerned about is most people try to go out at the light. If they only have the open space in the front, how do they get out to go left. She asked what curb cut does he want to close and is it on Montano. Mr. Giner stated on the table tonight the Commission should have a plan. He showed the one that they would like closed. This would allow people to get away from the intersection. If someone is trying to take a left here, it is very dangerous. Commissioner Longhi stated they all park there too. Mr. Giner stated he had one of the neighbors call him to say he was concerned because people who were parking were backing out on to the road. He mentioned that there had been a grassed area but over the years it got paved. Mr. Giner went back and pulled the 1994 site plan and one of the conditions was that the grass area had to be there. Apparently over the years that has been gone and people now park here and back right out on to the road causing issues for the residents and the people going by.
Chairman Duren stated there was years ago a pharmacy in there and people parked in the back parking lot. There was a door that allowed them to enter the pharmacy through the back door. Chairman Duren questioned if Mr. Bakul could work that out with the produce market because there is a large parking lot in the back. He asked if there is any way they could work a back entrance into the produce market. Mr. Giner stated the concern is that a lot of the parking for this site is shown in the back and there used to be a back entrance. He is not sure that is the case right now.
Mr. Bakul stated right now at the back of the produce market is a gate that opens. There is an overhead garage door. They don’t really have a door back there.
Commissioner Longhi stated there is a problem with parking there.
Chairman Duren stated he is trying to find a way to help with the parking because there is a lot of parking in the back.
Commissioner Falk asked if Mr. Bakul owns this whole plaza. Mr. Bakul stated he does.
Mr. Giner stated what the Commission has in Exhibit 15 is a photocopy of the site plan approved in 1994, SPR#912, showing the grassed area.
Commissioner Longhi stated the problem is if you go to the produce market, the cars are lined up all the way down the whole side. The problem is the traffic. If you take away that parking on the side and make it grass, she questioned if there would be enough parking. They are going to have to park in the back and walk around the front.
Mr. Giner stated he will have the parking that was approved. It is not the ideal situation but that is the way it has been since the seventies.
Commissioner Sarno asked why is the Commission concerned about parking. Are we thinking because if he sells beer, there is going to be more traffic? Chairman Duren stated he is before the Commission with an application and that is the only opportunity the Commission has to change things if the applicant is willing to do it.
Commissioner Sarno stated there is already an existing store and all they want to do is sell beer. The traffic has nothing to do with him selling beer. Chairman Duren stated he is the owner and if he were not, the Commission couldn’t be talking about changes either.
Commissioner Longhi stated in reading the Minutes, it was brought up about getting the church’s permission. She asked did they get the church’s permission and is there a church within 1,000 feet. Mr. Giner stated there is a store front church that came in and got approval fairly recently. They were made aware of the fact that there were already a number of establishments within 1,000’ of them. The church at the hearing said they had no problem with the uses being less then 1,000’ of them.
Chairman Duren stated in the area there is a barber shop.
Commissioner Longhi noted this particular spot is not within 1,000’ of a church. Mr. Giner noted it is within 1,000’ of that store front church. It is a commercial plaza with a hair cutting place. Chairman Duren stated the Teachers’ Association is in the back.
Chairman Duren asked if Mr. Bakul has had a chance to review the conditions. The main one the traffic officer is concerned about is the closing of the curb cut on Montano Road. He asked Mr. Bakul if he would be willing to close that curb cut. It is directly in front of the produce market. Mr. Bakul stated that curb cut has been there forever. He has been there since 2001.
Chairman Duren asked if Mr. Bakul would be willing to close that curb cut. He noted the Commission cannot impose that he do so.
Mr. Giner stated the only change is that Mr. Bakul wants to sell beer. You can argue whether that is causing increased traffic. Chairman Duren thinks it is the produce market that has increased the traffic.
Commissioner Longhi stated Sergeant Santanella gave the Commission a history of the accidents but he is not really saying what the reason is. He is not actually commenting on the application itself.
Chairman Duren read Sergeant Santanella’s comments which state the curb cut on Montano Road should be closed. Commissioner Longhi stated he is saying that adding beer will increase the traffic. Chairman Duren stated he is not. Mr. Giner stated those are his comments on the liquor application. He said if its going to generate more traffic, he would like to see that curb cut closed.
Chairman Duren stated the owner is here and it is a chance to ask him if he would be willing to close the curb cut. If he says no, it ends it.
Mr. Bakul stated what he would recommend is putting a sign up that says right turn only. Chairman Duren stated the problem is too much traffic coming out. The Traffic Safety Officer is trying to narrow the chances for traffic to come out in one spot. There is a wide opening. He has gone in the store and noted people cut through. They don’t want to wait at the light at Montano Road so they cut through. People that don’t want to stop at the red light come in through the parking lot. The area is wide open and it makes it another street.
Mr. Bakul stated he doesn’t really see people coming into his driveway. He sees people coming in to his plaza and they want to get to Montano Road. Also, there is a lot of traffic at the Dunkin Donuts.
Chairman Duren stated it is the recommendation of the Traffic Safety Officer to close off that curb cut. He asked Mr. Bakul if he would be willing to do so. Mr. Bakul stated he would not be in favor of closing the curb cut.
Chairman Duren asked if anyone wanted to speak in favor of this application or against it. No one spoke in favor or against the application.
Mr. Giner noted there are two waivers that need to be approved regarding this application. Also, one of the other conditions was to reiterate something already on the record as a previous approval which is to bring back the grassed area and put no parking signs along the north space.
Chairman Duren stated item #2 of Mr. Giner’s conditions cannot be enforced. Anyone making a motion would have to exclude #2 and renumber the conditions. There will then be seven conditions.
Commissioner Ladd asked about condition #3, the grassed area. Mr. Giner stated that stays. That was part of the original approved site plan.
Chairman Duren closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Falk made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Gregory, to waive the full submission requirements for PH#2691 in accordance with Section 9.2.10C with the finding that the information is not necessary in order to decide on the application’s conformance with these Regulations. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote.
Commissioner Falk made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Gregory, to waive the separation requirements between a licensed premises and a building containing a place of worship for PH#2691 with the finding that the Commission approved the Place of Worship with the understanding that it would be located within 1,000 feet of other licensed premises.
Commissioner Longhi stated she has a problem with this because she doesn’t have anything in writing that says it is okay from the church. That is her biggest concern. She is finding out that it is within 1,000’ but the Commission usually gets a letter from the place of worship saying it’s okay. Other applicants have been made to do this and now we’re not doing it.
Commissioner Gregory stated the church approved it originally when Mr. Bakul applied for a full liquor license. Commissioner Longhi questioned why that correspondence wasn’t in the meeting packet. Mr. Giner stated the Commission does have the authority under their regulations to waive that. Chairman Duren stated when the church came in there were other uses within 1,000’. Mr. Giner stated the church had no issue with the uses within 1,000’.
Commissioner Longhi stated from now on she would like to see such correspondence in the meeting packet.
The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote.
Commissioner Sarno made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Gregory, to approve PH #2691 – Special Use Permit for grocery beer license at an existing convenience store located at 565 Enfield St. in a Business Local (BL) District, Map 33, Lot 274, Shah Bakul, applicant; Saloneel LLC, owner. This approval is subject to conformance with the application record and the following conditions:
Conditions to be Met Prior to Signing of Certificate:
1. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns.
Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits:
2. The “Proposed Grass Area” shown in Exhibit #15 of the hearing record shall be restored with curbing acceptable to the Town Engineer.
3. “No Parking” signs shall be placed along the northern wall of the building.
4. This approval will become effective upon the filing of a Special Use Zoning Certificate signed by the Commission Secretary on the Land records by the owner of the property. Proof of such filing shall be in the file prior to the issuance of any permits.
General Conditions:
5. This approval is for the specific use and structures identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the structures will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.
6. The approval is for the Class 4 grocery beer license only. Any changes to the interior layout or functions of the space shall require an amendment to the Special Use permit.
7. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.
Commissioner Longhi stated she is not in favor of this application because if you look at the findings against it says if the location, size and character are not in harmony with the orderly development of the district as proposed and it will be detrimental to the orderly development of adjacent properties. Commissioner Longhi stated we are finding that this traffic does affect the adjacent properties and other things so adding a beer cooler increases more public coming in and out of there. It also says vehicular traffic to and from the use is an important issue. Commissioner Longhi stated she is personally not in favor of this application.
The motion was approved by a 6 – 1 – 0 vote. Commissioner Longhi voted nay.
Chairman Duren stated it meets the criteria of Section 8.10 regarding the retail sale of alcohol and it has accessible fire and police protection. It is on a corner and there is not that much residential use near it. There is a group home next to it. Commissioner Longhi stated she thought behind it was all residential. Chairman Duren stated he has quite a parking lot and there is quite a separation.
NEW BUSINESS
a. Request by Gerald Brooker for approval of a second driveway cut at 229 North Maple Street under Section 3.10.2 of the Zoning Regulations.
Mr. Gerald Brooker appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Chairman Duren stated he read the application and Mr. Brooker has had some consultations with the State Highway Commissioner and some conversations with the town’s zoning enforcement officer. With the material before him, he doesn’t understand why Mr. Brooker is in here but he gave Mr. Brooker a chance to explain it.
Chairman Duren stated Mr. Brooker states the curb cuts have been there. The Commission has received aerial maps from 1991 and 2004.
Mr. Brooker stated there was an existing farm there and there were three accesses to that property.
Chairman Duren asked what Mr. Brooker has to verify this for the Commission. Mr. Brooker stated he doesn’t have anything but when he came to the town, they have aerial views. Chairman Duren asked if Mr. Brooker could show him the driveway on the aerial plans because he can’t see a driveway. Mr. Brooker stated there is a 20” drop and there were slate pavers. You couldn’t see that from the road if you were driving by there.
Chairman Duren stated this is an aerial for 2004 and a topographical map from 1991 and both do not show the driveway. He asked that Mr. Brooker come up and show him the driveway on the aerial plans. Mr. Brooker pointed out the area on the plans. Chairman Duren stated there is nothing there and even the State Highway Department says it is not there.
Chairman Duren stated Mr. Brooker has been doing construction work on the house. He added the south side to it. He has been going in and out. Chairman Duren noted this picture is not really up to date. There are two aerials and neither one show the driveway. Mr. Brooker stated before he purchased the house, that was there.
Chairman Duren asked how Mr. Brooker explains the aerials that don’t show the driveway. Mr. Brooker stated the area going in and out of there was there before he purchased the property. Chairman Duren stated Mr. Brooker has raised the area. Mr. Brooker stated he improved the safety conditions because it was hard to come out of there. Chairman Duren stated he would tend to believe that it wasn’t regularly used as an exit. Mr. Brooker stated even to come out of the paved driveway, the incline is dangerous coming out of there.
Chairman Duren stated the aerial map doesn’t show it. Commissioner Longhi stated she went on another site and reviewed other aerials to see if there was a curb cut. She couldn’t find anything on the town aerials. She is looking for something from Mr. Brooker to say that this is different than what the town has for documentation.
Mr. Brooker stated he gave the letters from the neighbors. They have been there since the 1960’s.
Mr. Giner stated there was a claim that there was a second driveway. It does look like there might have been a worn little path there but he doesn’t think it was a formal curb cut. The issue is whether he would have to come before the Commission. If he could show that there was an existing curb cut, it was preexisting to the town’s regulations. The regulations were changed four or five years ago that said he couldn’t have one unless he came in to the Planning and Zoning Commission. He is here before the Commission to ask for approval of this driveway.
Commissioner Longhi stated according to the aerials, it is not showing that there is a curb cut. We’re trying to get documentation to show that these aerials are not correct.
Chairman Duren stated he is saying he has had a curb cut.
Mr. Giner stated if the Commission decided he didn’t have it, he is here asking for permission to have a curb cut. The question is whether the Commission wants to approve it or not.
Commissioner Longhi stated the Commission denied a second curb cut a couple of houses down. He put it in anyway and the Commission is trying to get him to remove it. It is an abutting property. Mr. Giner stated that is not the one that came in. The one next door has been there since 1993 and is grandfathered. The aerials clearly show that driveway. Commissioner Longhi asked if that was the applicant the Commission had a few months ago. Mr. Giner stated no, that is way down the road.
Commissioner Ladd asked why is this not a ZBA issue. Mr. Giner stated it is not a ZBA issue because the regulations do say a person can come in and request a second driveway.
Chairman Duren stated he has been saying to the enforcement officer that it was preexisting and he didn’t need to come in. He has had discussions with the State Highway Department who also wanted him to not use it. They are opposed to double curb cuts on state highways. Chairman Duren noted if Mr. Brooker is given approval tonight, he still has to go to the State Highway Department. Mr. Brooker stated he did talk to Robert Waldner from the State of Connecticut, District l. He suggested Mr. Brooker come to the town. He had no problems with it. He even thinks that the safety conditions of entering and exiting the driveway were improved. It’s very dangerous to come in and out of that driveway if you are backing out.
Chairman Duren stated that is the reason for not wanting the double curb cuts. North Maple Street is very busy anyway and it is difficult for anyone to come out on to that street. Mr. Brooker stated Mr. Waldner also said that by putting in the fill it helped.
Chairman Duren stated there was a question about if there were effective wetlands or anything along the way of the fill. Mr. Brooker stated the wetlands are on the north bound side of North Maple. All those houses sit on wetlands. On the end of his property, from point A to point B heading from south to north, and being on the south bound side, the only encroachment of wetlands is about twenty feet heading north bound on the south bound lane. That’s about 150’ away from his property which he owns but it is 150’ away from that driveway.
Commissioner Longhi stated on May 13 Virginia Higley sent a letter and Mr. Brooker was saying that it was a construction driveway. Mr. Brooker stated all he had said was that he was using it as a construction access. He is not going to sit and argue with somebody about something. He told her there was an existing driveway there. He has been working on the house for six years and he still is. Mr. Brooker told Ms. Higley that he was using it as a construction access just for the sake of no argument with anyone. He had informed her that the driveway had been there. To him it was a driveway because it had been used.
Commissioner Ladd stated the Commission has a letter dated February 16, 2010 from Robert Waldner. It states my conversations with Mr. Brooker have all dealt with the fact that he needs town approval before DOT can even consider and review plans for an additional curb cut. I have told Mr. Brooker that even with town approval, we might not grant approval for the other access.
Mr. Brooker stated the first driveway that is paved twenty feet off the edge of the road is where he attached the radius and then there is only one other curb cut.
Commissioner Ladd stated the circular driveway looks like it comes out not by where the access road was. Mr. Brooker stated it is right in with it. It is about eleven feet wide.
Commissioner Gregory stated there was another memo that came in the packet tonight dated today from Ms. Higley. It was in the folder tonight. It says that even though the town gives him approval, the state may not give their approval.
Chairman Duren stated the question before the Commission tonight is whether the Commission will allow Mr. Brooker the circular driveway with two curb cuts or not. Chairman Duren thought it would be moot if he came here tonight and proved that he had the two because that’s what he’s been claiming. Since it isn’t, the question is not whether or not there were two but whether the Commission is going to allow him two curb cuts.
Commissioner Sarno stated one of the Commission’s main concerns is the safety of people and she does think the circular driveway is much safer. To try to back out on to North Maple is very dangerous. She would give him the approval for the second cut and then let the state go from there. She thinks as far as safety goes, it is much safer for him to try to get out of his driveway.
Commissioner Gregory felt Ms. Higley’s contingent upon statement in her memo to the Commission should be included in the motion.
Commissioner Longhi stated the Commission does not know exactly where this curb cut is and what the distance is from the driveway. The drawings don’t really show where the driveway is going.
Commissioner Gregory stated the state would determine that.
Commissioner Longhi asked if that could be a condition because the Commission doesn’t know where the curb cut is.
Mr. Giner stated the regulations don’t have any standards for this. It says you have to come back to the Commission for a second curb cut but it didn’t say what the standards for approving the second curb cut would be or what the separations are. On state roads, you know that the applicant is going to have to go back to the state to get their approval. What Ms. Higley is saying in her memo is if you are going to approve something on a state road, to make sure that you hold people to a certain amount of time and that you put a condition on making sure that the state approves it. If they don’t then the applicant has to get rid of it anyway no matter what the town says. It is a state road.
Chairman Duren asked if there is anything from Sergeant Santanella. Mr. Giner stated there is nothing.
Chairman Duren stated his concern is the inconsistency because the Commission did not allow a curb cut further down the street. Also, Chairman Duren would like to take into consideration the people on the highway itself with so many curb cuts that they have to watch out for. There is on Mr. Brooker’s property plenty of land to do a turn around on the property without the circular driveway. He could not have the circular driveway with two curb cuts and instead have a turning space on the property as he has plenty of room for it. Chairman Duren would tend to vote against another curb cut.
Commissioner Longhi stated she feels similar about the curb cut down the street. She knows that was a concern down the street and the Commission did vote against a curb cut at that location. Commissioner Sarno stated he had three curb cuts and it was a little different from this application. The Commission denied it and gave him so much time to close it down.
Chairman Duren reiterated there is still room for another turn around if safety is the concern. Mr. Brooker can make a turn around area at the end of his driveway.
Commissioner Longhi made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Gregory, to allow Gerald Brooker to have a second driveway cut at 229 North Maple Street contingent on the applicant providing the Zoning Enforcement Officer with a copy of the approved State curb cut approval form within three months of the town approval. If the applicant fails to provide this document, the Planning and Zoning approval will become null and void and any and all additional curb cuts must be returned to their original undisturbed state.
Commissioner Falk agreed with Chairman Duren that there is room to create a turn around on the property. Asking for the second curb cut is a self-inflicted issue as opposed to not being able to turn around in your own driveway.
The motion failed by a 2 – 5 – 0 vote. Commissioners Ladd and Gregory voted in favor; Commissioners Duren, Falk, Lefakis, Longhi, and Sarno voted nay.
OTHER BUSINESS
a. Discussion of Bylaws
Chairman Duren noted the Commission has a copy of the revised Bylaws. He went through them and didn’t see any errors. The Bylaws were adopted previously by the Commission.
b. Report from Policy Review Committee
Commissioner Longhi stated Commissioner Ballard requested that she contact the people at Wetlands and they wanted to discuss policy review with the Fire Marshals. Commissioner Longhi wanted to send an email to the Fire Marshals to let them know that they are in the process of a policy review so that they could have some input. Mr. Giner also sent Commissioner Longhi a few follow-ups of what other towns are doing so she has been compiling the information she has been getting from him. Mr. Giner stated other towns have had the same issues with submissions and there was actually a discussion on the Planners’ List which he sent along.
c. Report from Signage Policy Review Committee
d. Discussion on Draft Plan of Conservation and Development
Mr. Giner is still trying to set a date for a meeting with the Town Council regarding the draft Plan of Conservation and Development.
e. Discussion of Tag Sale Regulations
Chairman Duren stated the Commission will need Ms. Higley to be involved in this discussion regarding tag sale regulations.
Chairman Duren brought up photo id’s and asked that Commissioner Lori Longhi be included when these id’s are issued. Mr. Giner will see where this stands with the Police Department.
Applications to be Received
There were no applications to be received.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Falk made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Longhi, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Peter Falk, Secretary
Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission
jmr
|