|
ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 3, 2004
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Thursday, June 3, 2004, in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. James Hickey, Jr. called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Anthony DiPace, Chairman (arrived at 7:45 p.m.)
Charles Duren (arrived at 8:45 p.m.)
Robert Egan
James Hickey, Jr.
Karen Krebs
Nicles Lefakis, Alternate
Kathleen Sarno, Alternate
Samuel McGill, Alternate
ALSO PRESENT: Jose Giner, Director of Planning
ABSENT: Jeffrey Cooper
Karen Weseliza
MINUTES
Commissioner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lefakis, to approve the Minutes of May 6, 2004. The Minutes were approved by a unanimous vote.
Staff Comments
a. Town Attorney (in writing)
b. Zoning Enforcement Officer (in writing)
Commissioner Egan requested a clarification of the definition of home businesses, something also requested by the Town Council in a March 7, 2004 memo to the Town Manager. Since the issues are similar to what Commissioner Egan raised, he asked that there be a coordination of effort and a response. Commissioner Egan noted that some of the home occupations being approved by the Zoning Enforcement Officer do not meet the definition of personal services. He did not feel a landscaping service or a loudspeaker repair service fit this personal service definition. Commissioner Egan also did not see a response to this inquiry from the Zoning Enforcement Officer.
Mr. Giner stated there was also a request for a report based on addresses and that is in progress.
Vice Chairman Hickey stated that the Zoning Enforcement Officer reported the receipt of 7 home occupation applications and 3 zoning enforcement violations.
c. Director of Planning and Community Development
Mr. Giner reported on Monday he will be attending the Town Council Meeting to brief the Council on the Aquifer Protection Agency designation that is proposed to be conferred upon the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Giner attended a brief presentation on this subject yesterday given by the DEP. The Town's first charge is to designate an agency. The DEP is still working on model regulations and they plan to have those ready in late summer or early fall. At that time, they will conduct regional training and information sessions. Mr. Giner did volunteer Enfield as a location for these training sessions.
Mr. Giner stated the Town does have two areas that are mapped Level A by the DEP. Once the Town gets word from the DEP that those areas are approved, the Town has a certain time frame to overlay them on their zoning maps and adopt a form of the proposed DEP regulation. Mr. Giner stated the next step in this process will occur in the fall.
Mr. Giner reported the Inland Wetlands Commission at their June 1, 2004 meeting had an in-house training session with the Town Attorney. The response from that Commission was the meeting was too short and should be held on a separate meeting night. It was the consensus of the Commission to schedule a workshop meeting with the Town Attorney either the second or fourth Thursday in September, 2004.
Mr. Giner brought up portable on demand storage units or pods in red or white which are becoming more prevalent. A lot of people are using these units as sheds and they really stand out in residential neighborhoods. Chairman DiPace suggested Mr. Giner draft an ordinance revision to address these. Mr. Giner stated the consensus throughout other towns was they were permissible for a temporary use or for no more than thirty days for such things as a home renovation. Mr. Giner stated the town's position has been to not allow these units for commercial uses.
Mr. Giner reminded the Commission that the meetings in July are the second and fourth Thursdays.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Margaret Jedziniak, Abbe Road, Enfield, called the Commission's attention to landscaping conditions throughout the town. Motorists accessing some of these streets cannot see the other traffic in the area due to the overgrown landscaping. She thought this should be looked into and there should be more stringent rules regarding maintenance of this landscaping. Ms. Jedziniak cited areas off Elm Street where this has occurred.
Frank Jedziniak, 232 Abbe Road, Enfield, stated in his opinion there is a new God and that is the all American dollar.
CORRESPONDENCE
Chairman DiPace noted receipt of a letter from Thaddeus and Paula Soltys regarding 1 Strawberry Lane and modifications to the existing berm located on their property. Chairman DiPace noted the letter delineates the improvements the Soltys would like to make. Mr. Giner stated it was his feeling that the Commission had previously approved a modification to that area. He noted the berm was for the benefit of the homeowner because of traffic on the crossing street. With the geometry of the roadway, there was the possibility that some light from the roadway would shine into the new subdivision. Mr. Giner stated he doesn't see a problem with this alternative plan because it is for the property owner's benefit and not a public improvement. Mr. Giner stated he will view the property and report back to the Commission.
COMMISSIONERS' CORRESPONDENCE
Chairman DiPace stated Public Hearing #2449 for 651 Enfield Street has been withdrawn as of today.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Continued from May 6, 2004 Meeting
PH#2442 - Application for a Special Use Permit for change of use from retail to auto dealership with improvements to utilities, landscaping and building facade at 481 Enfield Street, zoned BG, Map 33, Lot 256, LIA Auto Group, Applicant/Owner. (Must close by June 10).
Attorney Thomas Fahey appeared before the Commission along with Dana Steele of J. R. Russo and Eric Forish, the Construction Manager for LIA.
Mr. Steele reviewed some of the changes that were made to the plans since the last public hearing session. He stated the property at 481 Enfield Street that is the subject of this change of use application is a five-acre parcel in a Business General Zone. They have submitted revised plans for the Commission's review.
Mr. Steele stated there were a number of revisions made to address issues from both staff and the Commission. The Fire Department requested fire lanes around the building. Their concern was to have proper access to the rear of the building. What they found was locating the fire lane along the perimeter of the display area will give a better turning radius and better access to the rear. The entire rear of the property is now marked with a fire lane that will be painted on the pavement. There are also fire lane signs posted along the perimeter of the pavement and along the front of the building.
Mr. Steele stated there was a lot of discussion about loading and unloading of vehicles. They had shown a location for such loading and unloading and it was suggested that that be made an actual painted designated area. That area is now shown right next to the fire lane for the truck to turn out into the lane. This provides an area for loading and unloading while still allowing the cars that are parked in the first set of bays to be able to back out.
Mr. Steele stated Lieutenant Boula had requested that they post "no parking" signs along Route 5 and they have done so. The oil and water separator will meet the current DEP standards as well as the town standards for the floor drains in the building. The Town Engineer had a comment regarding a drainage concern on the north side of the building. It was a small puddle due to an indentation in the pavement and this is an issue the applicant was planning to address as a maintenance issue. They have addressed it at this time and proposed a new catch basin in that low point area and another one in the aisle which will connect to the existing drainage system.
Mr. Steele noted there was discussion about a maintenance schedule for the drainage system and Note #17 on the revised plans reflects the frequency and responsibility of cleaning. There were also a number of other issues related to the operations of the facility and they thought it would be helpful to include those as a note on the plan. The conditions of approval related to this application would be listed in Note #18 on page 2 of 4. These conditions include that there will be no outdoor speakers for the property. The lights will be turned off by 10:00 p.m. Trash pickup and delivery times are restricted to between 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Deliveries for the facility, whether parts or vehicles, will be limited to business hours.
Mr. Steele stated they also looked at the buffer surrounding the property on the north and east sides. They took photos of the property and Mr. Steele presented nine photos of various views of the property. He described the individual photographs.
Mr. Steele addressed a complaint from the residents that the sidewalk was inaccessible because the area was overgrown. The applicant has taken the initiative to clean up this area. The trees have been cut back to the fence line and the area has been swept out. In looking at the buffer area, the existing chain link fence is an eyesore and the plan is to replace the entire chain link fence with a cedar stockade fence for 930' from the northwest corner of the property all the way around to the southeast corner. Mr. Steele felt this would improve the aesthetics of the neighborhood as well as improve the need for future maintenance regarding the landscaping.
Mr. Steele stated because fencing is being proposed, they felt the additional plantings along the north side were not as crucial. They still show the elimination of some pavement so that it provides the 25' buffer. They feel this, with the combination of the existing landscaping, the existing vegetation and the fence, will provide a superior screen to what is there now.
Mr. Steele stated they looked at the south side of the property. He identified the properties in the area which included the first two owned by Artioli Dodge and the third which is residential. He added the fourth and fifth properties were completely screened by the building but with the third property, there was some visibility. They have some fencing but the applicant felt they could improve it by planting eight arborvitae five to six feet in height from the light pole to the corner to add additional screening.
Mr. Steele stated it was requested that they provide a photometric plan. Mr. Forish from Forish Construction has prepared both an existing and proposed lighting plan.
Commissioner Krebs asked about the dumpster hours. Mr. Steele confirmed they would be from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Mr. Forish reviewed the lighting plan. They were asked to prepare an existing photometric plan. Once that plan was prepared, it became obvious that there was a large void. There were only two rows of light poles on the front area. Contrary to what he stated earlier, they do have a proposed change to the lighting pattern of the site which would be to add one additional row in the front yard for a total of six pole fixtures between the two existing rows. These are 400 watt fixtures and the perimeter of the building only has 100 watt wall packs that are mounted at an eight foot height. Mr. Forish noted there would be very little if any spillage of light to the abutting properties. The idea for the improvement is specifically for the display area between the building and Route 5 and they feel this is a necessary improvement.
Mr. Steele added all the lights will be retrofitted with shields. Currently some of them are the type of wall packs where the light shines directly out and those will be corrected.
Mr. Forish stated there was quite a bit of discussion at the last hearing session regarding operations and the lack of control of delivery. That has been addressed at this site with a vehicle unloading area labeled on the plans. In addition to that, following the last meeting they did meet with representatives of LIA Auto Group. Mr. Forish presented a copy of a bill of lading from the dealership on Palomba Drive that specifically states that no parking is to occur on Palomba and that vehicles will be ticketed. The dealership, in addition, has removed inventory and all aisle ways are open and free. The comments from the Commission at the last meeting regarding other dealerships have been addressed.
Mr. Forish noted there are other dealerships on Palomba Drive and they cannot speak for them. They are aware they have some issues but they are addressing the issues from the LIA Auto Group. Mr. Forish stated Michael Lia is present this evening to respond to any questions relative to this operation.
Mr. Forish stated they did cut back the brush along the sidewalk. They are reluctant to do too much additional work at this time prior to any approvals but they wanted to give an indication that they heard the concerns. They wanted to show a good faith effort in improving upon conditions that have been deteriorating for many years. The improvement with the fencing should act as a good buffer in terms of the appearance for the neighbors in the back.
Mr. Forish presented a rendering showing the colors of the building. He noted the rendering is not accurate in the sense that the two gables that are shown on the rendering will be removed and the facade will be a horizontal facade. Regarding other aspects, this is an accurate rendering.
Attorney Fahey stated the applicant has addressed the comments of the Commission and the neighborhood from the last meeting. This application, should the Commission approve it, will prove to be a very good use of the property and a significant improvement from what is there now. LIA does spend a lot of time on their landscaping, are proud of their properties and will do the same thing here.
Commissioner Krebs brought up the memo regarding loading and unloading on Palomba Drive. She noted trucks from Forish Construction were parked on the road recently. Mr. Forish stated that was an error and they were immediately moved. They were there for one hour. Mr. Forish stated this has to do with Forish Construction and a misunderstanding on the part of their personnel and not the LIA Auto Group.
Commissioner Krebs reported there was an accident on Palomba Drive last Thursday that took out the sign on the Enfield Medical Center property. This was due to a parking issue. Mr. Forish stated he was unaware of that.
Chairman DiPace noted on the south side of the building where it abuts the back yards, there area four lights. He asked if four lights are really necessary and he asked if the lighting can be reduced to two. Mr. Forish stated those are the existing lights and they would be glad to implement that change and reduce the number to two lights on the south side.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the audience.
Rudolf Messier, 1 Dover Road, stated he has no objection to the Commission granting permission to open a car dealership at this location. He noted, however, that the sidewalk is still not very passable. Mr. Messier asked about their parking and how close they will be to Route 5. He noted presently, coming out of Colony Road, it is difficult to see because of the large bushes. He thought the fence was a good idea. He noted the dumpster in the back and he objected to the dumpster being emptied at 6:00 a.m. He felt anything after 8:00 a.m. would be a lot better for the neighborhood.
Russell Burgess, 3 Dover Road, stated his main concern is the dumpster. He has a five-month-old child and 6:00 a.m. for emptying the dumpster is too early. He also questioned if there are trucks on the site at 3:00 a.m. or 4:00 a.m., who should they call. They are on private property so they can't call the Police Department. Do they come back to the Commission? Mr. Giner stated residents should call the Police and report it and also inform the Zoning Enforcement Officer. Mr. Burgess also asked how high the stockade fence is. Chairman DiPace stated it is proposed to be 6' in height. Mr. Burgess commended the applicant for the work done in the back of the site to date.
Mr. Forish stated they are glad to improve on the landscaping but were reluctant to do more prematurely. They would be glad to not only eliminate some of the scrub brush but also consider pulling the fence back slightly to help the line of sight.
Mr. Forish addressed the comments about the dumpster. He stated they would be happy to limit the hours of the dumpster to 8:00 a.m. at the earliest.
Mr. Giner stated the Commission has a revised memo with proposed conditions. He reviewed some of the condition changes.
Mr. Forish stated regarding condition #24, the Manager of the Palomba Drive location had stated the hours would be Monday through Thursday from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and Sunday from 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Mr. Forish stated a simpler solution would be 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Hickey made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve PH#2442 - Application for a Special Use Permit for change of use from retail to auto dealership with improvements to utilities, landscaping and building facade at 481 Enfield street, Zone BG, Map 33, Lot 256, LIA Auto Group, Applicant/Owner. This approval is subject to conformance with the referenced plans, as may be required to be modified by this motion, and the following conditions:
Referenced Plans:
"Existing Conditions Plan, LIA Pontiac, 481 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut Prepared for: Lia Auto Group P.O. Box 5789 Albany, New York." Sheet 1 of 4, Scale 1"=40',by J.R. Russo Associates, dated 3-30-04. Revised to 5-27-04.
"Site Plan, LIA Pontiac, 481 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut Prepared for: Lia Auto Group P.O. Box 5789 Albany, New York." Sheet 2 of 4, Scale 1"=40', by J.R. Russo Associates, dated 3-30-04. Revised to 5-27-04.
"Landscape Plan, LIA Pontiac, 481 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut Prepared for: Lia Auto Group P.O. Box 5789 Albany, New York." Sheet 3 of 4, Scale 1"=40', by J.R. Russo Associates, dated 3-30-04. Revised to 5-27-04.
"Details, LIA Pontiac, 481 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut Prepared for: Lia Auto Group P.O. Box 5789 Albany, New York." Sheet 4 of 4, Scale 1"=40', by J.R. Russo Associates, dated 3-30-04. Revised to 5-27-04.
"LIA Pontiac, Enfield, CT. Elevation" Sheet A-3, Scale 3/32"=1'-0" by Forish Construction, Inc. Dated 01/21/04. Revised to 5-27-04.
"Lia Pontiac, Enfield, CT. Elevation," Sheet A-3, Scale 3/32" = 1'-0", by Forish Construction, dated 5/05/04.
"Lia Pontiac, Enfield, CT. First Floor Plan Overall," Sheet A-3, Scale 1/16" = 1'-0", by Forish Construction, dated 5/05/04.
Conditions to be Met Prior to Signing of Mylars:
1. All plans submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.
2. The file number "PH 2442" shall be displayed prominently on the final plan sheets either in the title block or in the area around it.
3. The final plans shall have a note stating "WPC shall be notified 24 ours in advance for all inspections required for installations of sewer systems. Please call 860-253-6450 -if no one is there, leave a message."
4. The plans shall be revised show the oil/water separator detail as required by the WPC.
5. The plans shall be revised to include the notes suggested in John Cabibbo, Assistant Town Engineer's e-mail dated June 3, 2004.
6. For all sewer pipes, show on the drawing(s) the length, diameter, slope, location, and type of pipe; for inverts show elevation in and out, and for frame(s) show elevation at the top. Sewer system shall conform to Town of Enfield, Subdivision Regulations, revised as of February 12, 2002, and on the Town of Enfield Public Works Department drawings titled Typical Details I, II and III.
7. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns. A copy of the Final Motion with conditions shall be placed on the plans submitted for signature.
Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits:
8. One set of final mylars and two sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning and Community Development Department for signature of the Commission. The signed mylars shall be filed with the Town Clerk prior to the Special Permit becoming effective.
9. 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.
10. A pre-construction meeting with Town Staff shall be held.
11. Any remaining engineering concerns such as those expressed in the Assistant Town Engineer's communication dated 5-5-04 shall be addressed prior to the preconstruction meeting.
12. The applicant shall post a bond for Site improvements in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer and with surety acceptable to the Town Attorney.
13. A Separate Erosion and Sediment Control Bond shall be submitted in the form of a passbook, pledged to the Town, in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer.
14. A landscaping bond, in an amount to be determined by the Planning Department shall be submitted to the Town.
Conditions which must be met prior to the Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance:
15. Complete as-built plans certified to Class A-2 accuracy shall be submitted prior to the issuance of any certificates of zoning compliance.
16. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Director final as-built plans in a digital format prescribed by the Director.
17. A DEP general permit will be required for automotive waste, submitted to the WPC for processing. This permit must be approved prior to signing of the Certificate of Occupancy.
General Conditions:
18. No parking of cars or inventory or any other obstruction shall be permitted at any time in the area designated for car carrier unloading.
19. There is to be no outside speakers permitted.
20. The hours for sales and service shall be Monday through Thursday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and on Sunday from 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. with no service on Sunday.
21. No lighting other than as shown on the site plan shall be permitted including any flood lighting on utility poles in the State Right of Way.
22. All site parking area lights must be turned off by 10:00 p.m. and only low wattage security lights on the building shall be turned on after 10:00 p.m.
23. Dumpster s may only be serviced between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
24. Delivery of vehicles is limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.
25. This approval is for the specific use and structure identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the structure will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.
26. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.
27. Construction of facilities as approved must commence by June 3, 2005 or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission.
28. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner 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.
29. The conditions specified by the Connecticut Water Company in a letter dated December 3, 2003 shall be met.
Commissioner Egan brought up the addition of Condition #29 above and Commissioner Hickey amended the motion to include that condition.
Commissioner Egan stated he cannot support this application for many reasons. Some of the comments made that the property was vacant for twenty years are not quite accurate. The type of attitude exhibited that the town will accept any type of business to fill an empty space is not always beneficial in the long run to the town or to the neighborhoods bordering such development. Commissioner Egan noted he thinks the Plan of Conservation and Development is very applicable to this application. The study commissioned by the Town showed that office space primarily occupied by service industries will continue to be a growth sector. This has been seen by the Phoenix being purchased by Mass Mutual and the demand for other office space. The other sector that is growing is the professional services sector, particular in health care. Enfield's location makes it a strong location for satellite operations of medical centers or independent medical facilities. The growth of the Johnson Memorial complex and the expansion of St. Francis and Hartford Hospital's presence is evidence of that trend. Commissioner Egan felt the Plan should be considered and noted there are other uses that would be less intrusive to the surrounding neighborhood.
Commissioner Egan also brought up the fact that the Connecticut Water Company has a problem with these types of facilities. There is already one in close proximity and there will continue to be an increase in hazardous wastes there. Commissioner Egan saw a need to begin to consider the aquifer protection issue. There were 200 signatures against this project and, according to the Master Plan, the abutting neighborhood residents should have some input. Commissioner Egan's opinion is the zone change originally should not have been granted but the Commission still has an opportunity to correct that mistake. Also, the applicant, based on past practices, has not continued the practices that they have stated they are going to continue to do. Once they get this permit, the Commission has no idea what they will do. The applicant has admitted they have no control over certain promotions and Commissioner Egan stated the noise is unbearable with some of these radio promotions. Commissioner Egan stated these were all the reasons that the Master Plan located car dealerships on Palomba Drive and out of residential neighborhoods. For all these reasons, he cannot support this application.
Commissioner Hickey commented that he feels the efforts to improve the property for the proposed use meet the criteria of the special use permit. While he understands Commissioner Egan's concerns, the Commission did vote several meetings ago to change the zone to Business General. This use is a special use in that district and the criteria needed to be demonstrated has been. He would vote in favor of this application.
Chairman DiPace added that he has been on this Commission for sixteen years and he has watched the process taken to attempt to revitalize Enfield Street. The zone was changed to Business Local which took away what used to be gasoline alley and the intent was to make the area look nicer. However, this never happened. There have been more and more eyesores developing up and down the street. Chairman DiPace stated he has seen what LIA can do with their dealerships. The concerns have been explained to them regarding the loading and unloading of vehicles and they are making progress regarding the safety concerns and eliminating vehicles parking in the street. Chairman DiPace felt the situation on Palomba Drive has improved due to the applicant's efforts. He thought the only way to truly revitalize Enfield Street was to reinvent the old.
The motion was approved by a 5 - 2 - 0 vote. Chairman DiPace, Commissioners Hickey, Lefakis, Sarno and McGill voted in favor; Commissioners Krebs and Egan voted nay. (Commissioner Duren did not participate in this vote because he was not present for the full hearing session.)
PH#2443 - Application for Special Use Permit to operate a private heliport pad at 132 Moody Road, zoned Industrial-1, Map 93, Lot 18, Alexander K. and Maurine D. Chickosky, Owner/Applicants. (Note: Continued from May 20, 2004 meeting to June 17 - Must close by June 17).
This public hearing will be heard at the June 17, 2004 meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - NEW
PH#2444 - Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review for construction of a 29,000 square foot industrial building and associated site improvements in connection with a proposed truck sales and service use at 239 Shaker Road, zoned I-2, Map 94, Lot 10, Camerota Truck Parts, Applicant, Automatic Reman LLC, Owner.
Michael Camerota and Wes Wentworth, the Project Engineer, appeared before the Commission regarding this application for the construction of a 29,000 square foot industrial building and associated site improvements.
Mr. Camerota stated they are requesting a special permit and site plan review. Camerota Truck Parts began approximately 45 years ago as a used car and truck parts yard. Over the years the use has evolved and about 25 years ago they stopped selling car parts and sold used truck parts. They now remanufacture truck transmissions, rear differentials and steering gear boxes and distribute them throughout New England. They now sell very few used parts.
Mr. Camerota stated the property is located on the corner of Shaker Road and the right of way at which their current premises are located. Several years ago they were awarded a Crane Carrier dealership. Crane Carrier is a specialty truck manufacturer and they manufacture trucks for fire departments and rubbish companies. The Town of Enfield has several Crane Carrier trucks in its fleet. They have also been approved recently as an Allison Automatic Transmission overhaul dealer or regional equipment dealer. Allison Transmissions are automatic transmissions that are used in larger trucks such as rubbish and dump trucks, rental trucks and motor homes. This facility will be used for remanufacturing these Allison transmissions and as a warranty center.
Mr. Wentworth of Wentworth Civil Engineers from Lebanon, Connecticut, presented a site map and described the location of the site. The site is 4.6 acres in size and zoned I-2. A 29,000 square foot building is proposed with 26,000 square foot footprint and a 3,000 square foot mezzanine for office use.
Mr. Wentworth stated there will be two accesses off the private right of way. There will be no access off Shaker Road. The layout and access to the building is designed for these larger vehicles. They have designed the site to accommodate the constraints of the vehicles. There will be twelve service bays. The south half of the building will have bays on both sides. The site is proposed to be serviced by public water and public sanitary sewer. The building coverage is 26,000 square or 12.9% of the site. Open space provided on the site in a non impervious area is 56%. Over half the site will remain vegetated. The site is proposed to be landscaped in accordance with the regulations. On the west and north side, the area will remain existing woodland. There will be landscaping provided on the north and east of the building, along the right of way and along Shaker Road. The landscaping requirements are in accordance with the zoning regulations which require 15% of the proposed parking area.
Mr. Wentworth noted they have been through Wetlands and have had many staff reviews with a lot of give and take on the design, location and technical aspects of this building. The plans before the Commission represent the third or fourth plan revision. The Wetlands Commission has approved this plan unanimously.
Chairman DiPace read an email that was sent to him and Commissioner Duren from Councilman Scott Kaupin. Mr. Kaupin requested that if this application is approved, he received a request that this proposal be placed on hold until such time as the issue of placing signs on Taylor Road is finalized. Mr. Giner stated there was a request before the Town Council to post signs about no trucks on Taylor Road. Mr. Giner stated the signs have been reviewed by Mr. Alsbaugh and they meet all the requirements. If the Commission approves the plans, Mr. Giner noted the signs are included.
Commissioner Duren asked if this site is close to the Old Fox Fertilizer property and has this property been affected by the pollution on that site. Mr. Camerota stated to their knowledge no. They have had engineers at Old Fox who are in the process of trying to clean up this site. They have dug test pits and so far they have not come up with anything. Mr. Camerota stated what he has been told in regard to the Old Fox property is because the site contained fertilizers and those types of chemicals, they do not travel. This property is located on the other side of the right of way.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the audience. No one spoke in favor or against this application.
Mr. Giner stated the Commission has comments from the Town Engineer and his comments are included in the proposed conditions of approval.
Commissioner Duren stated John Cabbibo's memo states the certified as built standard notes have been added to the plans and there are no engineering concerns.
Commissioner Duren asked if the notes are on the plans regarding the maintenance of the hooded catch basin. Mr. Giner confirmed if they are not on the plans, condition #3 addresses that concern.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve PH #2444 - Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review for construction of a 29,000 square foot industrial building and associated site improvements in connection with a proposed truck sales and service use at 239 Shaker Road, Zoned I-2, Map 94, Lot 10, Camerota Truck Parts, Applicant, Automatic Reman LLC, Owner. This approval is subject to conformance with the referenced plans, as may be required to be modified by this motion, and the following conditions:
Referenced Plans:
"Site Plan #239 Shaker Road Prepared for Camerota Truck Parts, Enfield, Connecticut, Location Map, Index to Sheets and Zoning Data." Sheet 1 of 9, Prepared by Aeschliman Land Surveying, PC., dated 3-30-04, revised to 5/26/04.
"Boundary & Layout Plan Prepared for Camerota Truck Parts, Enfield, Conn." Sheet 2 of 9 Scale 1"=40', by Aeschliman Land Surveying, PC, dated 3-30-04, revised to 5/26/04.
"Site Grading Plan #239 Shaker Road Prepared for Camerota Truck Parts, Enfield, Connecticut," Sheet 3 of 9, Scale: 1"=40', Prepared by Wentworth Civil Engineers., dated 3-30-04, revised to 5/26/04
"Sanitary & Storm Drainage Plan #239 Shaker Road Prepared for Camerota Truck Parts, Enfield, Connecticut," Sheet 4 of 9, Scale: 1"=40', Prepared by Wentworth Civil Engineers., dated 3-30-04, revised to 5/26/04
"Erosion & Sediment Control Plan #239 Shaker Road Prepared for Camerota Truck Parts, Enfield, Connecticut," Sheet 5 of 9, Scale: 1"=40', Prepared by Wentworth Civil Engineers., dated 3-30-04, revised to 5/26/04.
"Landscaping Plan #239 Shaker Road Prepared for Camerota Truck Parts, Enfield, Connecticut," Sheet 6 of 9, Scale: 1"=40', Prepared by Wentworth Civil Engineers., dated 3-30-04, revised to 5/26/04
"Site Lighting Plan #239 Shaker Road Prepared for Camerota Truck Parts, Enfield, Conn.," Sheet 7 of 9, Scale: 1"=40', Prepared by Aeschliman Land Surveying, PC., dated 3-30-04, revised to 5/26/04
"Erosion & Sediment Control Notes & Details #239 Shaker Road Prepared for Camerota Truck Parts, Enfield, Connecticut," Sheet 8 of 9, Scale: "None", Prepared by Wentworth Civil Engineers., dated 3-30-04, revised to 5/26/04.
"General Notes & Details #239 Shaker Road Prepared for Camerota Truck Parts, Enfield, Connecticut," Sheet 9 of 9, Scale: "None", Prepared by Wentworth Civil Engineers., dated 3-30-04, revised to 5/26/04.
Conditions to be Met Prior to Signing of Mylars:
1. All plans submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.
2. The file number "PH 2444" shall be displayed prominently on the final plan sheets either in the title block or in the area around it.
3. 2. A schedule and description of responsibility for maintenance of the storm water system shall be on the mylars.
4. The final plans shall have a note stating "WPC shall be notified 24 ours in advance for all inspections required for installations of sewer systems. Please call 860-253-6450 -if no one is there, leave a message."
5. The plans shall be revised show the oil/water separator detail as required by the WPC.
6. For all sewer pipes, show on the drawing(s) the length, diameter, slope, location, and type of pipe; for inverts show elevation in and out, and for frame(s) show elevation at the top. Sewer system shall conform to Town of Enfield, Subdivision Regulations, revised as of February 12, 2002, and on the Town of Enfield Public Works Department drawings titled Typical Details I, II and III.
7. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns. A copy of the Final Motion with conditions shall be placed on the plans submitted for signature.
Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits:
8. One set of final mylars and two sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning and Community Development Department for signature of the Commission. The signed mylars shall be filed with the Town Clerk prior to the Special Permit becoming effective.
9. 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.
10. A pre-construction meeting with Town Staff shall be held.
11. The applicant shall post a bond for Site improvements in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer and with surety acceptable to the Town Attorney.
12. A Separate Erosion and Sediment Control Bond shall be submitted in the form of a passbook, pledged to the Town, in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer.
13. A landscaping bond, in an amount to be determined by the Planning Department shall be submitted to the Town.
Conditions which must be met prior to the Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance:
14. Complete as-built plans certified to Class A-2 accuracy shall be submitted prior to the issuance of any certificates of zoning compliance.
15. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Director final as-built plans in a digital format prescribed by the Director.
16. A DEP general permit will be required for automotive waste, submitted to the WPC for processing. This permit must be approved prior to signing of the Certificate of Occupancy.
General Conditions:
17. This approval is for the specific use and structure identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the structure will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.
18. This project is also subject to conditions of Wetlands Permit #410.
19. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.
20. Construction of facilities as approved must commence by June 3, 2005 or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission.
21. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner 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 Hickey pointed out that this application more than satisfied the conditions of the special use.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternates Lefakis and Sarno voting.
PH#2446 - Zone Change from Business Local (BL) to Business General (BG), 809 Enfield Street, Map 29, Lot 72, 809 Enfield Street LLC, Applicant, Linda Ronen, Owner. (Must close by July 8).
Attorney Thomas Tyler and Dana Steele of J. R. Russo appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Attorney Tyler informed the Commission of a change in this application. Since the application was initially filed, this property has since been transferred and is now owned by an LLC that is totally owned by the Artioli family.
Attorney Tyler stated they have also filed a site plan application and it is working its way through the ART process. They hope that will be before the Commission shortly. They may comment briefly on that application based upon other issues that have been raised regarding other car dealerships on Enfield Street tonight.
Attorney Tyler stated the loading and unloading of vehicles will all be on the site and will not take place on Enfield Street.
Attorney Tyler stated the history of this property dates back to a time when there were a lot of car dealerships on Enfield Street and he briefly mentioned some of them. Proposed for this site is a Kia dealership. Attorney Tyler stated the applicant has been unable to confirm that Brake King also had a dealer's and repairer's license. They have confirmed that they had a repairer's license.
Attorney Tyler stated they believe a Business General use for this property is consistent with the businesses in the area. They think it would also assist in further revitalizing Enfield Street.
Dana Steele of J. R. Russo stated the zone change map has been prepared and identifies the various zones surrounding the property. The area to the east of the subject parcel is Residential. This is consistent with what occurs all the way up Route 5 to the north. Currently the site is zoned Business Local. The parcel immediately to the south is currently a split use between an SNET office and a day care facility. The properties to the north are zoned Business Local but are residential uses based upon observation. Further to the north is the Troiano gas station. Across the street is the Enfield Town Hall property and the Town green. There is an area of existing Business General that overlaps slightly with the property across the street. They are proposing to merge with that and have Business General in this area.
Mr. Steele stated the property is approximately one acre in size. The applicant feels he can make use of it for the purpose of a car dealership as well as repairs. Currently, the property is being used by Brake King for repairs.
Mr. Steele stated while this is just a zone change application, for conceptual purposes he would like to show the site plan which has already been submitted and is going through staff review.
Mr. Steele noticed there are no handicapped parking spaces on the existing site although the site is configured so that handicapped access can be obtained from the end of the building. They would propose that the area be restriped so that that area meets the regulations in terms of handicapped access.
Mr. Steele stated the main benefit is the cleaning up of the facade of the existing building. This also provides an opportunity to address a drainage problem that is currently on the site. They discovered there is a low spot in the pavement where the runoff has no where to go. There is no curb and the water currently flows across the sidewalk and into the street. This hazardous situation will be rectified with the addition of curbing and a catch basin. They will also add stop signs and stop bars at the entrances.
Mr. Steele stated with car dealerships, one of the main issues is the loading and unloading of vehicles. He pointed out an area on the site plan where this can occur. This is an unusual site in that it is almost all paved and the building takes up a good portion of the property. A portion of the front parking lot is in the state right of way. This is an existing use that has been there for some time and they have shown a location on the site for the unloading of vehicles.
Mr. Steele stated there is opportunity to do additional landscaping. They have not yet proposed any and are open to suggestions. One of the concerns is the sight line and some of the existing trees. They are considering replacing some of the larger trees that are creating a sight line problem with lower lying shrubs and they would like Commission input.
Commissioner Egan asked where all the cars would be parked. Mr. Steele stated there is existing parking for customers in the front. Employee parking will be provided in the rear. Display would be along the side and in an area in the back. Mr. Steele pointed out the inventory area on the site plan. The display area would be along Park Avenue.
Steve Draculate, Ray Brown Architects, presented a site plan of the proposed building. The building is going to be used interiorly as it was used in the past. Presently the service bays are all to the south and will continue in their use. The parts areas are in the back which will continue as well. On the corner will be the showroom.
Mr. Draculate stated the main emphasis of the architecture is a cleaning up of the facade. The main changes are that they are cleaning up the clutter. An existing freestanding sign will be removed. There is a glass block that is painted in a checkerboard format and that will be cleaned up and eliminated. The entire glass facade at the showroom will be replaced with a new store front system.
Regarding the display area, Mr. Draculate noted within the perimeter of the existing awning that goes all the way around, they plan new entrance ways on Enfield Street and Park Avenue. Presently there is an existing awning. They will clean that up and the part of the awning that drops down will be raised up and filled in. The entire facade is going to be on Enfield Street and on Park Avenue. The area partially around on the side of the building is going to be covered with a material that is an insulation and stucco product. Signage will be addressed with the site plan. Mr. Draculate presented elevation drawings showing the building appearance.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the audience. No one spoke in favor or against this application.
Commissioner Egan questioned if this use is compatible to the area, why would they need a zone change. Mr. Giner stated the former use, Brake King, does not sell cars. They could have come in with an application from one nonconforming use to another but the burden of proof would be to show that they are not making the property more nonconforming. With the sales of cars, it would have been difficult to prove that they were not increasing the nonconformity.
Chairman DiPace stated this property was Peter Chevrolet, Louis Chevrolet and Carl Chevrolet in the past. In 1992, this property still had a dealer's license. City Tire bought the property and had a dealer's license which they never used. Brake King took over after that. The building was constructed for a car dealership.
Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve the zone change from Business Local (BL) to Business General (BG) for property at 809 Enfield Street LLC, Applicant, Linda Ronen/Artioli, Owner. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternates Lefakis and Sarno voting.
The reason for the zone change is it adds a benefit to the Town of Enfield by improving a building falling into disrepair. The intended use should also bring more people to the downtown area.
PH#2449 - Special Use Permit to change one non-conforming use to another (restaurant/catering to offices) at 165 Enfield Street, zoned R-33, Map 32, Lot 25, David Karat, Applicant, Flying Wings Realty LLC, Owner. (Must close by July 8.)
Chairman DiPace read a letter of withdrawal from the applicant, David Karat. Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to accept the withdrawal of PH#2449 without prejudice. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
PH#2393.02 - Modifications to previously approved Landscape Plan for Costco at Stateline/Freshwater Plaza (Permit PH#2393) at 130-136 Elm Street, zoned BR, Map 57, Lots 329/346, SEA Enfield Stateline Plaza LLC and SEA Enfield Freshwater Plaza LLC, Applicant/Owner. (Must close by July 8.)
Attorney Susan Hays of Updike, Kelly and Spellacy and William Fleming of William Fleming Associates appeared before the Commission regarding these modifications.
William Fleming, the landscape architect, described the proposed changes with regard to the landscaping. The first change was a request from Costco to rearrange some of the plant materials to add more color. They also requested a clustering of the shrubs and trees in a more efficient manner to address the maintenance of the landscaping.
Mr. Fleming stated the second change is the package store addition to the building required a rearrangement of those plant materials. The third item is they were transplanting the existing plant materials located along the roadway. Over the year of construction, those plants no longer exist. They are replanting the Bradford Pears, the burning bushes, the forsythia and two species of dogwood shrubs.
Mr. Fleming presented an enlarged plan of the proposed plant material. The issue was to make sure the Bradford Pears were spaced in a similar way along their frontage. They have extended the planting into the area adjacent to the wetlands. The Bradford Pears will be terminated with a little leaf linden. They also reorganized the red and yellow twig dogwoods and put them in an area where they could grow successfully.
Chairman DiPace stated the Commission did not receive the current plan showing the addition. Mr. Giner apologized for the mix-up but stated the plans were received. He presented the new plan to the Commission.
Attorney Hays noted the 3,000 square foot building addition will be located in the front of the building adjacent to the canopy. It will be accessed through the canopy. You will not be able to get into the addition from the store but only from the canopy area.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public. No one spoke in favor or against this application.
Mr. Giner stated at the administrative review team meeting, there was some discussion about the strip that is in front of the parking lot to the extreme south facing Freshwater Boulevard. There is an attractive line of trees that will be broken up in that area. The area will be narrowed because of the road widening and planting trees with a root system might pose a problem. Mr. Giner stated one of the suggestions was to use grass pavers, remove some parking spaces and install a planted island.
Attorney Hays stated with the current plan, they were talking about transplanting the trees mentioned by Mr. Giner. However, when the trees were removed, their root system was too large to allow transplanting in the designated area. They are now replacing the trees with new Bradford Pears.
Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve PH#2393.02 for modifications to the previously approved Landscape Plan for Costco at Stateline/Freshwater Plaza (Permit PH#2393) at 130-136 Elm Street, zoned BR, as presented. All other conditions of PH#2393 remain in effect. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternates Lefakis and Sarno voting.
PH#2393.03 - Special Use Permit for a Class 3 permit for package store for sale of all alcoholic beverages in an addition to a previously approved retail store at 130-136 Elm Street, zoned BR, Map 57, Lot 346, SEA Enfield Freshwater Plaza, LLC, Applicant/Owner. (Must close by July 8.)
Attorney Susan Hays appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Chairman DiPace referenced the testimony made in PH#2393.02 as applicable to this public hearing.
Attorney Hays stated the proposed addition to the Costco facility at 130-136 Elm Street does comply with all the requirements of the zoning regulations with respect to coverage and required parking spaces. The site, with this addition, will continue to comply with the zoning requirements. The hours of operation for the package store will be the same hours of operation as the store itself except where the store is open later than the current liquor laws allow. Unloading will be done through the loading dock in the rear and the merchandise will be taken through the store into the front. There will be no loading in the front. There will be no access to the package store facility except internally through the canopied entrance. There are some emergency egress points as shown on the building floor plans.
Attorney Hays stated it is their belief that this application complies with the regulations with respect to use and area as set forth in Section 8.10 of the zoning regulations and Section 9.20.2, the special permit criteria. This is a planned commercial development and they have complied with all the distance requirements that are established with respect to the location of these facilities. They comply with all the special permit criteria set forth in Section 9.20.2 and the state requirements with respect to package stores.
Attorney Hays noted that the Town of Enfield has four or five more available package store permits at the state level and that is based on the town population. She added that there are 13 currently in the Town of Enfield and the town is approved for 18. Some discussion followed regarding the number of package store permits outstanding.
Chairman DiPace noted it was stated that all loading and unloading would occur through the rear. Attorney Hays stated the loading will be done through the rear of the large retail facility and the stock will come through the store and be brought in the front door. Attorney Hays stated it is their opinion that what they are proposing and what they have designed meets the state requirements.
Commissioner Egan would like to see something in writing that says those number of package store permits are available. Mr. Giner stated when Stop & Shop was approved, there were 18 available and 14 issued. Commissioner Krebs noted the permit given on Taylor Road. Mr. Giner stated that was prior to the issuance of the Stop & Shop permit.
Further discussion followed.
Attorney Hays stated if this Commission approves the special permit for the use and the permit is not available at the state, the use would not be approved.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public.
Jeff Weisner, owner of the Jug Shop Package Store, 80 Hazard Avenue, spoke in opposition. He noted there are four package stores and three grocery stores that sell beer in a two-mile radius of where Costco is locating. He questioned why another one is needed. He stated he doesn't want to go the way of the hardware store or the drug store which are gone because of CVS, Rite Aid and Home Depot. He doesn't want to lose his business.
Mr. Weisner stated he read the liquor control laws and the package store can have no access to Costco's at all. If it has a door that goes into the building, it has to be sealed by Liquor Control. If that seal is ever broken, they can pull the permit. Mr. Weisner questioned why Costco has not yet applied for a liquor permit. He would like to know who is going to own Costco's and are they the same people that own the package store. Will they also own the gas station? Mr. Weisner stated gas stations and liquor should not, according to the state liquor control, be owned by the same owner.
Mr. Weisner would like to know the number of feet between the front door of the package store to the front door of Harry's. He noted they have not presented him with specific plans to confirm this measurement. Also, of the 3,000 square foot building, how much will be retail and how much will be stock. They cannot keep stock in the big store because that would be against the law.
Mr. Weisner presented a petition from people against this package store proposal.
Margaret Jedziniak, Abbe Road, stated she was asked by the owner of M&R Package Store to speak to the Commission. She asked how many package stores a town this size needs. She believes there are enough already and another one is not conducive to the improvement of the health and welfare of the public in this town. Ms. Jedziniak stated she is under the impression that the Town of Enfield has a considerable amount of DWI's happening at the present time and more of those are not needed. The population in Enfield has decreased. Ms. Jedziniak questioned what can this store give the consumer in Enfield that the other stores already existing cannot give them. They cannot give them a better bargain because of the price regulation in Connecticut.
Dominick Alaimo, owner of Freshwater Package Store, stated he has been in the liquor business for twenty-five years. As far as delivering liquor, you cannot pass through another store or drop it anywhere else. It has to be at the location of the package store. Regarding the licensing, for every 2,500 people, the town is allowed one permit. The state regulation reads that you have to use the latest census of the town. Mr. Alaimo stated Costco has stores in Brookfield, Waterbury, Norwalk and Milford, Connecticut. Not one of these store locations has a liquor permit. He noted at this time Enfield has about 3,200 people per liquor store. He questioned why Costco is trying to use Enfield as their first start with a liquor store, why don't these other larger cities have liquor permits and why Costco never applied there.
Dan Gustofson, 306 Hazard Avenue, asked that the Commission not make a decision tonight regarding this package store until the Commission finds out what all the regulations are. If the town gives approval tonight, that would almost tell the state that the town accepts it and the state would probably accept it also.
John Schlatz, 42 South Road, stated for this meeting he did not see a sign in front of the Costco facility notifying the public that a liquor store would be built there. He stated he had to do so. Chairman DiPace stated there were public hearing signs posted.
Mr. Schlatz emphasized according to the state regulations, no liquor can go through another store unless it is a package store. With the retail store attached to the package store, he questioned how they will access the package store unless they go in the front door of the package store. He noted there are 85 pages of rules from the Liquor Control Commission. He also discussed other package stores in the area.
Mr. Schlatz also noted that his liquor license was approved before he came to the town and he asked why the same procedure was not followed for Costco. He also reiterated the fact that a sign advertising that a package store would be at this location was not posted. Chairman DiPace explained some applicants do it the opposite way and get approval from the Town first and then apply for their liquor license. Mr. Schlatz stated if enough people complain to the Liquor Board, they may have to go for a hearing.
Dominick Alaimo, owner of Freshwater Package Store, stated in Connecticut there is also a law that the most you can own is two package stores. He was wondering if Costco's was planning on opening one other store in the State of Connecticut. He felt the Commission should ask Costco why they picked Enfield, a small town in comparison to the other larger cities where they are located.
Attorney Hays stated they looked into the gasoline and liquor licensing question and they received the opposite answer that the gentleman had. She also went through the liquor licensing statute and regulations page by page and there was nothing with respect to that question. Attorney Hays stated if it turns out that this is the case, either there won't be a liquor permit issued for this facility or Costco will comply with whatever the requirements are at the state level. Attorney Hays stated Costco is presently in the process of getting their licensing for the gasoline station. The state does not license it until the construction is completed. They will have to have an individual permitee with respect to the liquor store and they will address that. If it turns out that Attorney Hays' interpretation and reading of the statutes and regulations is incorrect, they will address that or they won't have a liquor store.
Chairman DiPace stated the applicant noted there will be no loading or unloading in the front of the building. If the package store is in the front, it does have to be inside that area. Attorney Hays stated that is not her understanding from their liquor licensing attorney. She is not the attorney who is taking this through the liquor licensing process. One of the issues that they were concerned about in the design and development of this building is the loading because they do not want to have it in the front. The present procedure is the product would be dropped off at the Costco retail facility and be brought through the store to the package store.
Commissioner Hickey asked if the package store is a standard feature of the Costco facility. Attorney Hays stated it is dependent upon location and what state you are in. One of the other Costco facilities in the state did have a liquor store but it closed. They are working on another facility within the state that has a liquor store. There is also a Costco's in Waltham, Massachusetts and that has a liquor store.
Commissioner Hickey asked if the package store is leased out to a third party. Attorney Hays stated it would be run by Costco.
Attorney Hays stated with respect to the signs, signs were posted on Freshwater Boulevard and on Elm Street. The public comments may be with respect to the sign posting that is required by state statute for the state permit process. This is a large sign that is supposed to be on or right in front of the building. As they are not yet in that process, the sign is not yet up but during the process, the procedural requirements will be complied with. With respect to the timing of the state permit, as the Chairman stated, people do it both ways. From their perspective, they felt it they were not going to get approval here, it did not make any sense to go forward and attempt to get it at the state level. Attorney Hays' understanding also is that the state will not issue a license if you don't have local approval.
Attorney Hays stated with respect to why do we need this package store, she questioned why another store is needed anywhere in Enfield. This is America and America is based on capitalism and competition. Costco's business is to service its business and its clients. While they hope a certain number of their clients come from Enfield, they also anticipate a significant number of clients will come from areas outside of Enfield. This package store will allow people to complete their shopping experience without having to drive somewhere else. The issue is does it comply with the zoning requirements and not if it is a good or a bad thing for the Town of Enfield.
Attorney Hays pointed out that Costco's cannot be cut rate and she confirmed the liquor prices are filed with the state and you can't sell anything for lower than that price. This package store is not an attempt to drive out of business any of the package stores in town but it is to enable its customers to take care of their entire shopping experience at this store. It is Costco's intent to comply with all of the town's requirements and regulations with respect to package stores and it is their intent to comply with all the state regulations and requirements. If it turns out that those regulations are different than what they think they are and it results in a modification to the operation of this facility, they will be back before this Commission for a modification of their permit. They believe they comply and Attorney Hays hopes that the Commission agrees and approves their application.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public again.
Dominick Alaimo, owner of Freshwater Package Store, stated Costco should have had their liquor attorney present tonight. As far as comparing package stores to another bagel shop or another shoe store, he does not think bagels and shoes are controlled substances. As far as dropping off the liquor, when you deliver liquor, you have to bring it to the approved site which is the liquor store and the liquor store only. Any other procedure would be against the law. Mr. Alaimo felt the applicant should have their liquor attorney present to review the statutes.
Jeff Weisner, 55 South Road, discussed Costco's pricing. Because of their big market and other items in the store, they can sell everything in the package store at minimum bottle pricing, something he cannot afford to do with his present overhead.
Margaret Jedziniak, Abbe Road, noted when the attorney admits they cannot sell liquor for any less than any other store can but the minute that Costco gets into Enfield, there will be signs advertising discount liquor. They get the people thinking that they are getting liquor for less than any other stores. Their way of advertising and doing business is, in Ms. Jedziniak's opinion, very misleading.
Commissioner Duren asked if signs are included. Mr. Giner stated the signs are part of a different application. Attorney Hays confirmed they did not submit sign applications at this time.
Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve PH #2393.03 - Special Use Permit for a Class 3 permit for package store for sale of all alcoholic beverages in an addition to a previously approved retail store at 130-136 Elm Street, Zoned BR, Map 57, Lot 346, SEA Enfield Freshwater Plaza, LLC, Applicant/Owner. This application is subject to conformance with the record plans submitted and the following conditions:
Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits:
1. The record set of plans previously approved shall be revised to show the new layout resulting from the addition of the Package Store.
2. A final plan, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning Department for signature of the Commission.
3. 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:
4. This approval is for the specific use and structures identified in the complete application. Any change in the nature of the use or the structures will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.
5. All conditions of approval for PH 2393 not specifically modified by the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission shall remain in full force and effect.
6. This project shall be maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.
7. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner 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.
8. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns. A copy of the Final Motion with conditions shall be placed on the plans submitted for signature.
Commissioner Duren stated if the town approves it but it does not meet the state specifications, the state will step in. Also, this is a membership only store and if someone is not a member, they cannot go in to the store and make a purchase.
Commissioner Hickey stated a lot of the objections that were pointed out tonight are very technical in nature having to do with the licensing laws and liquor laws in the State of Connecticut and were far from actual Planning and Zoning issues. The presentation made tonight was to the point concerning planning and zoning. From his personal experience, Commissioner Hickey noted this store is designed to bring people from a regional basis in North Central Connecticut and southern Massachusetts and it is not tailored strictly for the Town of Enfield.
Chairman DiPace stated he believes the Liquor Control Commission will review this application. If it is not correct, they will recommend changes or deny the application. As far as this Commission denying something because there are already two or three in town, he questioned where should the Commission have drawn the line with package stores. He noted the Commission cannot limit competition. The state can regulate how many permits the town can have but if the town is below that limit, how can the town stop them and say no. Chairman DiPace has seen other Costco liquor stores in Florida and Massachusetts and he noted to deny an application based on competition is illegal.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
PH#2451 - Text Amendment for a new Section 10.30.8 to allow decorative civic banners within the public right of way in the Hazardville Design District, Town of Enfield Planning Department, applicant. (Must close by July 8.)
Mr. Giner stated Bill Lee from the Hazardville Institute is present tonight. He previously requested the Commission allow banners similar to what is allowed in the Thompsonville Village District zone in order to raise money for a non-profit organization such as the Hazardville Institute. Mr. Giner stated the Commission has received the proposed regulation and he read from the regulation.
Mr. Giner stated the Town Council would be the ones issuing the permit for such banners. There are poles that are maintained and they would have to have permission from the owner, the Town of Enfield.
Chairman DiPace asked about the banners in Thompsonville and if they are sponsored. Mr. Giner stated the town owns those banners. Mr. Lee confirmed they were purchased by the town.
Commissioner Duren asked about procedure. If banners were requested, someone would go to the Town Council. He questioned why such banners would be in this Commission's regulations. Mr. Giner stated the town is still subject to zoning and they would be considered Type A signs.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public.
Bill Lee, Stony Brook Road, made a comment about the content of the proposed banners. There are some state DOT regulations that regulate the content that can be placed on a sign of this type along a state highway. He spoke to DOT and the Connecticut Light and Power to insure that the height of the banner arms are within their regulations for clearance. They can demonstrate to the Commission the final size of the banners. Mr. Lee did discuss with Mr. Giner the limits on the sponsorship wording. This wording would not exceed ten to fifteen percent of the overall size of the banner.
Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve the text amendment for a new Section 10.30.8 to allow decorative civic banners within the public right of way in the Hazardville Design District as heard in Public Hearing #2451. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
PH#2452 - Text Amendment to Section 4.40.5 to allow certain properties which were rezoned in December of 1987 to apply for rear lots if they meet specified criteria. Town of Enfield Planning Department, applicant. (Must close by July 8.)
Mr. Giner stated the Commission previously heard a concern a few months ago during public participation. Someone raised a concern when rezoning occurred changing R-17 to R-33 which created certain lots that had quite a bit of land area behind them but not enough frontage to be able to split the lots. The lady who spoke presented a specific example on King Street. Because the frontage requirements were increased, there was no way that she could get the extra frontage to meet the current regulations.
Mr. Giner stated the intent with the regulation amendment was to allow someone who brings in a subdivision to be able to apply for a rear lot after the land had already been subdivided. This regulation is limited to the lots that were existing and changed during the rezoning.
Commissioner Duren asked how many homes would be allowed on a 25' right of way. Mr. Giner stated the regulations above do not change and no more than two configurations are allowed to be approved. In the existing regulations, only two rear lots may be accessed over a single common driveway. That would be the limit.
Commissioner Duren asked if that fact should be referenced. Mr. Giner stated such information is already included and they would have to meet all the criteria. This regulation change would allow something that had already been subdivided to come back if they had excess land in the back. It would allow the frontage requirements to be met through an easement. Mr. Giner stated this would be under limited circumstances and it would be by special permit. Any issues of concern could be raised at the public hearing.
Commissioner Duren asked how many lots this regulation change would affect. Mr. Giner stated it would affect the people that came before the Commission. He also has had requests from other people that have lots that don't quite meet the requirements but were part of a conventional subdivision.
Mr. Giner added that most R-17 lots would not qualify because of their size.
Commissioner McGill asked about the significance of the December, 1987 date. Mr. Giner stated that is the date when the zoning changed. There was a major rezoning in the town and the properties that were R-17 were changed to an R-33 zone.
Vice Chairman Hickey opened this application to the public. No one spoke in favor or against this application.
Mr. Giner stated this amendment has been sent to CRCOG as required and their response was there was no conflict with the regional plans.
Vice Chairman Hickey closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve the Text Amendment to Section 4.40.5 to allow certain properties which were rezoned in December of 1987 to apply for rear lots if they meet specified criteria as heard in Public Hearing #2452. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
NEW BUSINESS
SPR#1266 - Application to remove existing Nailite Panels, replace the damaged and fallen brick work on Church Street side (west side), replace enclosed entrance on the Alden Avenue side with two windows, put up two awnings over the two entrance doors on Alden Avenue, repair existing rear stairs and enclose the upper porch at 4 Alden Avenue (Old Polish National Home), zoned TV, Map 27, Lot 99, Jan Fijolek, Applicant/Owner.
Jan Fijolek appeared before the Commission regarding this application involving 4 Alden Avenue (the former Polish National Home). He stated while it is a new application, it contains the same changes requested in his former application.
Chairman DiPace stated the last time Mr. Fijolek was before the Commission, he did not have color schemes available to show the Commission. He asked if the colors are available at this time.
Mr. Fijolek stated he submitted the colors to Mr. Giner. Commissioner Duren asked if there is a listing of materials that are being used and where they will be used. He also questioned the marble that was missing at the bottom of the columns.
Mr. Fijolek stated he will remove the existing Nailite panels and the same color will remain as was there before. The color was a brown with a white trim on the wood work. The red color he plans to use will be the shade of the awning. He noted the picture is a computer generated one and the actual red color may be slightly different.
Chairman DiPace stated prior to voting on this application, he would like to see color samples. He would also like to know what changes there will be. During the last application, there was a plan showing where the marble would be replaced at the bottom. Mr. Fijolek stated the marble has been gone for sometime and he doesn't know what type of marble was there previously. Mr. Fijolek noted for 35 years they have been adding and changing the side materials due to breakage.
Commissioner Duren requested that Mr. Fijolek bring samples to the Commission to show what he plans to put on the building.
Chairman DiPace stated there is a need to see exact colors. If the Commission denies this application, there will be enforcement action. Chairman DiPace stated this application was denied previously because Mr. Fijolek ignored going to the ERSC meetings and did not come to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting until the last day of the application. Mr. Fijolek stated he was never invited to the ERSC meetings.
Commissioner Lefakis asked that Mr. Fijolek obtain a sample of the awning fabric from the supplier.
Mr. Giner asked for Mr. Fijolek's present address as he believes agendas for the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings and the ERSC were sent to him.
Commissioner Duren read a memo dated May 11, 2004 from the ERSC noting that the insufficient items in the present application. He noted the lack of materials and samples with this application.
Mr. Fijolek questioned if he should withdraw his application again. He would remove the existing panels and leave the building as it is with the original wood work.
Mr. Giner stated the ERSC meets next Thursday. Mr. Fijolek stated he could not make that meeting due to a previous business engagement.
Mr. Giner stated the ERSC recommended the present application not be approved.
Chairman DiPace emphasized the need for colors and samples of building materials. Mr. Fijolek stated he will withdraw his application and remove the panels.
Chairman DiPace stated the work that has been done was done without the necessary permits. He stated Mr. Fijolek may withdraw his application which will result in the town sending the Zoning Enforcement Office out to inspect the site. If the building is in violation, the matter will be turned over to the Town Attorney and the matter will end up in court. The court will order Mr. Fijolek to do what is required to be done.
Mr. Fijolek stated he was not aware that this was such a big issue.
Chairman DiPace reiterated the need for color samples. The hearing can be kept open and Mr. Fijolek can submit the color samples and material samples.
Commissioner Duren asked about the design in the back. Mr. Fijolek stated the back is unsafe and the boards have to be removed and replaced with pressure treated wood.
Chairman DiPace stated he will continue this application pending receipt of the necessary samples.
Mr. Giner introduced Peter Bryant from Community Development. He stated he has only been here for three months and will fill the Commission in on the details of this project. On February 12, 2004, Mr. Fijolek attended a meeting of the Enfield Revitalization Strategy Committee with Ray Warren. The results of that meeting were an overview and limited restoration project with options. Quite a bit of time and effort was put into this document by Roger Alsbaugh and Lou Grimaldi and the document contains some very good suggestions. The applicant could use some of this information going forward with a new application and improve the property.
Mr. Bryant stated at the last ERSC meeting, they reviewed an application from Mr. Fijolek that they felt was incomplete. He believes by using some of the options in the document, Mr. Fijolek could have a development that is worthwhile doing. Also, starting July 1, the Community Development Department will be initiating a commercial revitalization program. Mr. Fijolek can apply to this program to get some funds to help with the building project. There are options available and the Community Development Department is ready to assist.
Chairman DiPace read a memo dated February 25, 2004 from the Planning Department to Mr. Fijolek giving him the suggestion to reapply for the building improvements. He stated the Commission is willing to work with Mr. Fijolek but needs the necessary colors and samples. If something is going to be repainted, he should bring in a sample of the color.
Chairman DiPace continued this application to the June 17, 2004 meeting.
SPR#1272 - Application for modification of proposed plans (and sign permit) for building elevation changes, addition of building signage and modification of fenced outdoor storage/sales and sign permit at 51 Palomba Drive, zoned BL, Map 56, Lot 7, Glen P. Oxford, Applicant/ DEVCON Freshwater LLC, Owner.
Glen Oxford of Oxford Architecture in Nashville, Tennessee appeared before the Commission regarding this application. Also present was Wil Sulesky of Tractor Supply Company, Nashville, Tennessee.
Mr. Oxford stated they are applying to use the former Frank's building. They plan to add two new signs to the facility, one on the front and one on the side. They are also changing the green stripe on the building to a red stripe which is the corporate color of Tractor Supply. They are modifying the fenced area on the right side of the building to eliminate a facia that was placed there by Frank's. It is deteriorating and does not work with the Tractor Supply theme.
Mr. Oxford stated the site plan will show a change in the front fence line. The ordinance doesn't allow for sidewalk display which is a big part of Tractor Supply's operation. They are placing a sign at the opening of the gate so that customers can walk in and see items displayed behind the fence. The rest of the product will be stored behind another fence which is about 20' behind that first area.
Chairman DiPace asked about the color red that will be used and is it similar to the color red shown at the bottom of the site plan. Mr. Oxford stated they are not changing that color on the building but only the red stripe on the top. Chairman DiPace noted the tower going up is red also.
In response to a question from Mr. Giner about the existing brick on the building, Mr. Oxford stated they would not be changing the brick or the color of it.
Commissioner Duren asked about the location of the loading docks. He would like to see the plans submitted with the proper labels showing direction. There were also no north arrows on page two of the plans.
Commissioner Duren noted in Roger Alsbaugh's memo dated May 14, he asked if the concerns regarding the signs have been met. Mr. Oxford stated they did not receive that memo. Commissioner Duren stated Mr. Alsbaugh notes there are problems with the elevations and they do not match the text. Mr. Oxford stated the dimensions of the signs were stated in the application submitted. Mr. Giner stated the issue was whoever was applying for the signs was not coordinating with the applicant. Mr. Alsbaugh requested additional information. Mr. Giner noted that signs can be approved independently.
Commissioner Duren asked the reason for the increase in the gates on the west side. Mr. Oxford stated there were two ten-foot gates at one time and a 5' gate next to the building. They increased the front fence line to 40' to allow customers to enter and peruse the product.
Commissioner Duren asked about curb cuts. Mr. Giner stated this plan has been modified. Right now there is a trellis on the site and they are proposing to remove the trellis. Commissioner Duren asked whether there will be vehicles driving in and out of the gate that was widened. Mr. Oxford stated the way a customer would use the side yard is they would bring their truck and a trailer, pull straight into the side yard and load items from the side yard. Commissioner Duren asked if they wanted to cut the curb and allow cars to drive in and out of that location. Mr. Oxford stated that was their intent.
Commissioner McGill asked if there are other Tractor Supply stores in the area. Mr. Oxford stated this will be the first one in Connecticut. They have another proposed in Barkhamsted. They have 500 stores nationwide and the business is starting to come into this area.
Mr. Giner pointed out that Mr. Alsbaugh still has some issues with the proposed signage. He pointed out proposed condition #2 states the Commission is only approving the use. The details on the final plans regarding signage must be approved by the Planning Office. Chairman DiPace stated the Commission can approve this application subject to Mr. Alsbaugh receiving permission from the land owner to allow these signs to be constructed.
Commissioner Duren requested an additional condition that the final plans be revised to show directional elevation labels.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey to approve SPR 1272 - Application for modification of proposed plans (and sign permit) for building elevation changes, addition of building signage and modification of fenced outdoor storage/sales and sign permit at 51 Palomba Drive, Zoned BL, Map 56, Lot 7, Glen P. Oxford, Applicant / DEVCON Freshwater LLC, Owner. This approval is subject to conformance with the referenced plans and the following conditions:
Referenced Plans:
"TSC Tractor Supply Company Enfield, Connecticut, Site Plan" Sheet AS-1, by Oxford Architecture dated 2/13/2004
"TSC Tractor Supply Company Enfield, Connecticut, Floor Plan" Sheet A-1, by Oxford Architecture dated 2/13/2004
"TSC Tractor Supply Company Enfield, Connecticut, Site Plan" Sheet A-2, by Oxford Architecture dated 2/13/2004
Conditions to be Met Prior to Signing of Plans:
1. All plans submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.
2. The signage is approved in thematic concept only. Details shown on the final plans must receive a final approval from the Planning Office prior to the Secretary's signature of the final plans.
3. The application number shall be displayed on the plans in or near the Title Block area.
4. 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:
5. Two sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning Department for signature of the Commission.
Conditions which must be met prior to the Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance :
6. Final Inspection required.
General Conditions:
7. All outside storage and display shall be in designated areas in compliance with the requirements of Section 5.30.4 of the Enfield Zoning Regulations.
8. This approval is for the specific use and structure identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the structure will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.
9. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.
10. The plans shall be revised to show directional elevation labels.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to extend the meeting beyond 11:00 p.m. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
SPR#1273 - Application for modification of plans previously approved to construct a 30 foot x 70 foot shed on concrete slab to be used for storage at 230 Shaker Road, zoned I-1, Map 94, Lot 8, Anocoil, Applicant/Owner.
Dana Steele of J. R. Russo appeared before the Commission regarding this application from Anocoil.
Mr. Steele stated Anocoil located at 230 Shaker Road is requesting to add a 30' x 70' storage shed to the west side of their building as shown on the plan submitted. The parcel is 25 acres in size. The only comment from Town staff of concern was from the Town Engineer regarding the impervious coverage for the site. Mr. Steele added Note #5 to the plans indicating the parcel has 16 percent impervious coverage currently. The storage shed will add about .1% to that total and 16.1% is well under the maximum allowed.
Mr. Steele introduced Alan Seagrave, Jr. from All Phase Enterprises who described the use of the storage shed. Mr. Seagrave stated Anocoil is a printing manufacturer and they are looking to add this 30' x 70' facility to the left elevation of the building for a compressor room. The dry storage facility is an area where they are going to temper the product. It requires a dry environment for a period of time. The proposed shed is a pre-engineered building.
Commissioner Egan noted the building has been labeled as chemical storage. Mr. Seagrave stated that has changed. The aluminum plate that they manufacture will come into that room and sit in the dry storage area for two hours and then come out and go into the factory. There are no chemicals involved.
Mr. Giner stated there is another application that requires Wetlands approval and is not part of this application. Mr. Steele stated there is an existing mechanical pad on the south side of the building or in the back. A new one will be located right beside it pending approval from the Wetlands Commission and is not part of this application. The pad is 52.5' x 26' and is proposed to be enclosed by a chain link fence with privacy slats. Mr. Steele requested that Mr. Giner be authorized to approve this addition administratively.
Commissioner Egan asked what the concrete pad will be used for and are they going to put in another incinerator. Mr. Seagrave stated it is their intent to install another one. No permit is necessary from the DEP for this second incinerator because it has already been granted for the existing one. Commissioner Egan noted there had been some emission violations at this location that the DEP was following up on at one time. Mr. Seagrave stated as of this time, the emissions that are indicated have been in compliance. Following additional discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission that this additional incinerator application should come back to the Commission for approval.
Commissioner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve SPR#1273 with the standard applicable site plan approval conditions. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Bond Releases
SPR#1088 - Request for Engineering Bond Release for Tobacco Valley Teachers Credit Union, 182 South Road, in the amount of $34,305.83.
The Commission requested an updated report prior to the release of this bond. This item will be on the Commission's next agenda.
Other Business
Applications to be Accepted
The following applications were accepted by the Commission:
PH#2454 - Application for a change of use from auto repair to auto repair and sales, renovations to building interior and facade at 809 Enfield Street, zoned BL (BG Zone is pending), Map 29, Lot 72, Dana Steele, Applicant/Artioli, Owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled for July 8, 2004.
PH#2455 - Application for Special Use Permit to allow parking of a commercial vehicle (Matco Tools Truck) in a residential driveway at 22 Oxford, Zoned R-33, Map 58, Lot 292, Christopher J. Cutter, Applicant/Owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled for July 8, 2004.
Adjournment
Commissioner Hickey made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 11:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Charles Duren, Secretary
Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission
jmr
|
|