The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a meeting at the Avon Town Hall on Tuesday, September 27, 2011. Present were Duane Starr, Chairman, Douglas Thompson, Vice-Chairman, Carol Griffin, Linda Keith, David Cappello, Peter Mahoney (arrived at 7:45pm) and Alternate Donald Bonner. Mr. Bonner sat for the meeting. Absent were Marianne Clark and Alternates Elaine Primeau and Christian Gackstatter. Also present was Steven Kushner, Director of Planning and Community Development.
Mr. Starr called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Thompson motioned to approve the minutes of September 13, 2011, as submitted. The motion, seconded by Ms. Keith, received approved from Messrs. Thompson, Starr, Cappello, and Bonner and Mesdames Keith and Griffin.
PUBLIC HEARING
App. #4554 - William Deramo, owner/applicant, request for 2-lot Resubdivision, 2.69 acres, 359 West Avon Road, Parcel 4520359, in an R40 Zone
App. #4555 - William Deramo, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section IV.A.5.of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit waiver of density requirement, 359 West Avon Road, Parcel 4520359, in an R40 Zone
Mr. Starr stated that the applicant has requested a continuance to the Commission’s next meeting, scheduled for October 18.
Ms. Keith motioned to continue the public hearing for Apps. #4554 and #4555 to the Commission’s October 18 meeting. The motion, seconded by Mr. Bonner, received unanimous approval.
App. #4560 - Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section III.G.4.a of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit activities in the floodplain/ floodway for expansion to Fisher Meadows Park, 800 Old Farms Road, Parcel 3360800, in an ROS Zone
Also heard at this time but not part of the public hearing:
App. #4559 - Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Site Plan Approval to construct new pavilion, multi-use fields, and parking lot expansion and renovation, Fisher Meadows Park, 800 Old Farms Road, Parcel 3360800, in an ROS Zone
Present to represent these applications were Michael Cegan, ASLA, and Joe McDonnell, Richter & Cegan; Katie Mercier, Nathan L. Jacobson & Associates; Scott Hesketh, F.A. Hesketh & Associates; and Glenn Marston, Director of Parks and Recreation, Town of Avon.
Mr. Marston offered background information and explained that the proposal to expand Fisher Meadows Park dates back to the early 1990’s and has been shown in the Town’s Capital Plan since 1991. Currently there is no funding available for this project but a master plan has been created. He noted that approval has been received from the Inland Wetlands Commission. Mr. Marston noted that this proposal has been his long-term mission.
Mr. Cegan displayed a site plan and explained that the subject site is bordered to the east by the Farmington River and Avon Old Farms School to the west. The project area is 12 acres in size and located just north of the existing fields. He explained that, basically, all of Fisher Meadows Park is in the floodway; he added that Avon Old Farms School has a large recreation program that is also located in the floodway. He commented that recreational uses, in Avon and in many other locations, are permissible and make sense in a floodway. The Town is aware of and understands the maintenance needs associated with recreation areas in the floodway. Mr. Cegan explained that some low-impact development techniques have been incorporated into the proposed plan.
Mr. Cegan explained that the subject 12-acre area is an open hay field and has been farmed for a number of years; essentially, all of the impact would be to an open field, which would be minor. The existing perimeter trail around the pond has been incorporated into the design and would be preserved; the buffered vegetation around the pond’s edge would also remain. He noted that the area proposed for the new athletic fields is flat and the soils are rich and well drained. The proposal is for 7 multi-purpose fields; the fields are all under sized and geared towards U8 and U10 soccer levels but could be used for other sports. He noted that the plans show two full-size fields on either side of the central walkway to provide the Town flexibility in the future. A new parking lot is proposed,
as an extension of the existing lot; 191 new spaces are proposed. The only structure proposed is an open-air pavilion, which is the exact same design and detail as the existing pavilion; special anchoring is used to withstand floodwaters. A service road connection to Avon Old Farms School is proposed, as requested by Town Staff, to provide two ways into the Park. The parking lot is heavily treed and all species are floodplain tolerant; a line of trees also parallels the service driveway. The existing walk around the pond would remain. Mr. Cegan explained that there are a number of low-impact development techniques that have been incorporated into the plan; water is proposed to be infiltrated back into the ground. A rain garden is proposed for the center of the parking area; all surface flow is oriented towards the garden, which would help with infiltration as well as water quality. A wet meadow is proposed for the west side, where the
subsurface conditions are different. A butterfly garden/habitat is proposed, in response to comments from residents. Mr. Cegan noted that there would be no impact to flood levels but there would be an increase in flood capacity/flood storage. He noted that some material would have to be taken off site and conveyed his understanding that an earth removal application would be required when/if funding becomes available for construction of this project.
Mr. Mahoney sat for the rest of the meeting.
Katie Mercier, civil engineer, noted that Nathan L. Jacobson Associates prepared the storm water design and flood study. She noted that low-impact development (LID) features were implemented into the site such as a gravel parking lot (as opposed to a paved parking lot) that slopes in towards a rain garden. Nine or 10 infiltration galleries are proposed for underneath the walkways and on the sides of the fields; the intention is to get the water into the ground and have excess water discharge directly into the pond. She noted that 90% of the storms that would occur would be water-quality volume storms that would infiltrate into the ground. She explained that the proposed wet meadow, another LID technique, would be a depressed area that promotes water infiltration into the ground. Ms. Mercier
explained that there is a net cut from existing grade to finished grade. She noted that a flood study was done but also noted that the Farmington River has been part of a previous flood insurance study done by FEMA; some of the cross sections shown already exist, as they were done by FEMA. Ms. Mercier explained that in order to conduct the study, 2 additional cross sections showing site grading were added to the FEMA study to see how water would pass over the land. She noted that the study shows 0.00, meaning no change in water surface elevation from existing conditions to proposed conditions. She referenced Mr. Cegan’s earlier comments and reiterated that there would be an increase in the River’s storage capacity due to a proposed net cut of material.
Scott Hesketh, traffic engineer, reviewed the Traffic Impact Statement, dated August 15, 2011. He noted that automated traffic volume counters were installed on Old Farms Road for a 7-day period to measure background traffic volumes; Old Farms Road carries average daily traffic volumes of approximately 4,300 vehicles. Morning peak hour is approximately 530 vehicles while the afternoon peak hour is approximately 615 vehicles; Saturday volumes were measured at approximately 2,876 vehicles on a daily basis with a peak hour of just under 400 vehicles. Mr. Hesketh noted that the counts were taken on Old Farms Road just west of the site driveway. He commented that traffic volume counters were also installed in the main site driveway to the fields; the count was done at a slighter later time than the Old
Farms Road counts. The main parking area, which represents about 75% of the parking field, on the site generated approximately 342 daily trips with a peak hour of 86 vehicles. Saturday trips equated to approximately 1,500 vehicles with a peak hour of 237 vehicles. Mr. Hesketh noted that accounting for the fact that traffic counts for 25% of the parking area was able to be obtained, the site generated about 455 trips on a daily basis with 114 peak-hour trips and approximately 2,000 trips on Saturday with approximately 315 peak-hour trips.
Mr. Hesketh addressed the proposal to add 7 athletic fields, which would result in an increase of approximately 70%. He noted that the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Manual indicates that 10 athletic fields would generate approximately 642 daily trips; which is approximately 200 more trips than were counted for the subject site. The ITE Manual suggests that a park would generate slightly over 1,000 peak-hour trips, which is about half of what was counted at the subject site. When changing the count from 10 to 16 athletic fields, the ITE Manual projects an increase of about 145 trips during PM peak hour and approximately 200 additional trips during the Saturday peak hour. Mr. Hesketh explained that no manual counts were done at the site because all conditions have to be just right
(i.e., weather, right day) and it has to be planned in advance. He noted that it is felt that the automated counts, done over a longer period of time, would provide a better indication of what is going on at the site. He commented that the directional split of traffic to and from the site was assumed at 50% in each direction on Old Farms Road; right turns in and out of the Park can be achieved quite simply. Left turns out of the Park during Saturday peak hours would average approximately 80 seconds delay per vehicle. Mr. Hesketh explained that people tend to leave all at the same time once sporting events (i.e., 3 or 4 games being conducted at the same time) conclude and, therefore, a peak hour factor of .5 was used; that is, 100% of the peak hour traffic exited the site within a half hour. He noted that the background traffic volumes on Old Farms Road on Saturdays are significantly less so even though the site is generating more traffic during
Saturday peak hours, the levels of service are much better. Mr. Hesketh concluded by noting that the traffic volumes during peak hours don’t rise to a level where additional traffic measures would be needed; the existing stop sign condition is appropriate but suggested that during special events some police control may be needed at the intersection. He added that scheduling is the key and noted that it would be beneficial if the Parks and Recreation Department staggered the start times for Saturday events.
Mrs. Griffin asked why it is assumed that 50% of the traffic would go east and 50% would go west when the majority of residents live west of the site. Mr. Hesketh explained that during a Saturday peak hour, there would be teams coming in from out of town and most of those individuals would be directed to access the site via Route 10. He further explained that right-turn movements are very easy when exiting the park; both left and right turns into the Park are also easy. He commented that if 75% of the traffic is making a right turn out of the site, that scenario would equate to Service Level B, which is good and not a concern. Mr. Hesketh explained that since no actual turning movement counts are available he noted that he has made a very conservative analysis assuming a higher volume of left-hand
turns while presenting a worst-case level of service for the driveway. He added that this information, while relying on the Commission’s opinion that a higher volume will turn right, shows that the levels of service would be better for that movement.
Mr. Bonner asked whether the additional parking that is proposed is going to be enough to eliminate the cars that always park along Old Farms Road and not in the parking areas. Mr. Marston commented that people often park where it is convenient, even though there are plenty of available parking spaces. The master plan for Fisher Meadows attempts to maximize the usefulness of the existing fields/facility by moving certain fields into different areas and although the proposal is to add 7 fields to the existing 8, a total of 15 fields would not exactly be the case. He commented that there are two major tournaments during the year and added that an Avon police officer is onsite for both events and a “no parking” sign is posted on the road. Mr. Marston noted that he feels the recommended
parking is more than adequate and added that scheduling is important but is relatively easy to accomplish. He commented that one aspect of the master plan is to consolidate activities to improve maintenance/financial concerns.
In response to Mr. Mahoney’s questions, Mr. Hesketh explained that the counts on Old Farms Road were done between April 12 and April 26, 2011. The counts within the site were done from May 21 to May 27, 2011. He added that the weekend before Memorial Day was covered but not the Memorial Day tournament. He stated that he feels that the results are a representative sample but added that the time constraints did not allow for any counts of fall athletics.
In response to Ms. Keith’s question, Mr. Cegan explained that the topsoil would be put back on site after the work is done. Ms. Keith asked whether the material could be stored, temporarily, across the street from Fisher Meadows. Mr. Kushner explained that most of the Fisher Farm is located in the floodplain/floodway so filling is restricted. He noted that there is only one area of the Fisher Farm that is not deed restricted and that area is located at the center of the site, along Tillotson Road on the east side of the road. He commented that, theoretically, some fill could be placed there but questioned whether that made sense. Ms. Keith conveyed her thought that storing the material right there would seem to be better than having so many trucks hauling dirt a further distance on
roads that are already congested with traffic.
In response to Ms. Keith’s question, Mr. Marston explained that the existing dirt road around the pond would not be affected at all by the subject proposal. He added that it was a conscious decision by the Town to stay as far away as possible from the dirt road for purposes of the pond, the trail, and the proposed parking lot. Mr. Cegan confirmed that the existing dirt road would be preserved and not impacted. Ms. Keith commented that a couple of the proposed fields are near the dirt road/walkway and asked whether fences would be put up to keep balls out. Mr. Marston noted that temporary fencing has been discussed but explained that, at this point, the fields proposed for near the dirt walkway would be used by smaller children who would not likely be able to hit a ball that far. He
added that sometimes fields have to be played before you can tell how it will work out. Mr. Cegan explained that the larger fields are proposed to be located further away from the dirt path.
Ms. Keith asked if the parking lot could be redesigned and/or if cement cones could be used so vehicles would not be able to park along the grass shoulder on Old Farms Road. She noted that parking on the road endangers the children. Mr. Marston noted that there has been an ongoing, long-term discussion about why that area is not posted for “no parking”. He added that there are often times no reason for cars to be parked in the road, as there is an enormous overflow parking lot that is empty. He commented that it would be beneficial if the Commission recommended, as a condition if an approval is granted, that the area be posted as “no parking”. Ms. Keith indicated that she would like to see the area posted as “no parking”. Mr. Bonner noted his
agreement. Mr. Starr commented that no parking on Old Farms Road could be made a condition if an approval is granted.
Mr. Hesketh reported that the south side of Old Farms Road is posted for “no parking” but the north side is not posted.
Mr. Cappello asked, in connection with maintenance issues, what would happen to the existing soccer fields at the Town’s public schools. Mr. Marston explained that the school fields will continue to be maintained, as they will also be used for athletic practices. Mr. Cappello commented that he feels it makes more sense for the fields to be spread out, all over Town, as there is plenty of parking at the schools.
Mr. Marston noted that field maintenance for game preparation can be handled more efficiently by the Town when it is consolidated in one location. He explained that the majority of the existing fields at the schools are currently being maintained for practices. He commented that the addition of athletic fields would allow for rotation of the existing fields and give some of the overused fields a needed rest.
In response to Mr. Cappello’s question, Mr. Marston stated that the subject proposal at Fisher Meadows, if constructed, would result in more fields and more parking than exists at Tunxis Meade in Farmington. He added that Fisher Meadows Park is a high-quality facility and reiterated that the level of maintenance would not be reduced/compromised.
In response to Mr. Cappello’s question, Mr. Cegan explained that the proposed cuts and fills are necessary for proper drainage on the site without creating any floodplain impacts. He added that there would be very little change to net elevation.
Mr. Kushner noted that there is no application for earth removal at this time, as there is currently no funding available for this project. He commented that there are two major projects in connection with the reconstruction of Old Farms Road (the road and the bridge) that have been in the works for many years. He added that it has been decided that it would be best to wait to submit an earth removal request for Fisher Meadows until the timing for all these projects is known, as there could be conflicts.
Mrs. Griffin asked whether the conservation easement on Tillotson Road is the only reason why the proposed fields are not more spread out. Mr. Marston noted that, essentially, none of the property on Tillotson Road can be developed, as it was purchased with open space funding. He added that there is one isolated area, located very far down the road, that could be used but there is no power or water source nearby and it would be very disconnected from the rest of the facility.
Mr. Mahoney asked whether all the proposed fields would initially be recreational in nature and not regulation-sized fields. Mr. Marston explained that the goal is to recapture a lot of what the Town already has because it is not known what the Town’s needs/priorities will be in 10 years. He noted that lacrosse is growing at a very fast rate and is all over Town.
In response to Mr. Mahoney’s comment, Mr. Kushner explained that any change to the location of the Old Farms Road bridge would not affect the new proposed parking area. Mr. Cegan noted that there may be a slight impact to the existing overflow parking area but noted that the intent is to move the overflow parking across the street. Mr. Marston added that the overflow parking proposed for the other side of the street would have access under the bridge, so that there would be no need to cross the River.
In response to a general discussion about parking, Mr. Kushner explained that the land areas near the Old Farms bridge could, in the future, be considered for formal parking areas by the Town, as these areas are not subject to any State restrictions.
There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4560 was closed.
App. #4562 - Proposed Amendment to Avon Subdivision Regulations pertaining to Low Impact Development (LID); Town of Avon, applicant
App. #4563 - Proposed Amendment to Avon Zoning Regulations pertaining to Low Impact Development (LID); Town of Avon, applicant
Mr. Kushner reported that the Town Engineer and the Director of Public Works are working on revisions to the proposed regulations and have asked for additional time to review the details.
Mr. Mahoney motioned to continue the public hearing for Apps. #4562 and #4563 to the next meeting, scheduled for October 18. The motion, seconded by Mr. Cappello, received unanimous approval.
App. #4566 - Avon Park North 150 Associates, LLC, owner, Farmington Valley Academy Montessori, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VI.G.3.e. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit unlimited extension for Montessori school use, 150 Fisher Drive, Parcel 2280150, in an IP Zone
Present to represent this application was Sharon Healy, applicant.
Ms. Healy noted that the request is for an extension of time to allow the Montessori School to stay at 150 Fisher Drive. She noted that this is the sixth year the school has been in operation. She explained that the School’s lease has been extended for an additional year and further explained that the School is trying to negotiate a longer-term lease. Ms. Healy noted that the School would like the ability to remain at their present location on a permanent basis but, at the very least, would like to be able to stay for one additional year.
Mr. Starr asked whether the limit on the number of students, a condition of the original approval, is still being adhered to. Mr. Starr noted that there is no request to change the number of students. Ms. Healy concurred and noted that the School cannot expand while the CREC School occupies the other half of the building.
Mr. Kushner noted that the Town received a complaint about trash collection times from a nearby resident.
Ms. Healy noted that the School was not aware of the trash problem until today; she explained that apparently the trash company has been picking up the trash in the middle of the night and the noise is disturbing the residents. She noted that she called the landlord/manager of the property who has indicated that immediate action would be taken to ensure that the trash company comes at a different time. Ms. Healy stated that the trash used to be picked up in the morning and added that the trash company will certainly be made aware that there are nearby residences.
Mrs. Griffin asked whether another school could move into this location without permission from the Commission, if the Montessori School is granted an approval without a time limit. She asked whether the approval would go with the land, as the Montessori School does not own the building. Mr. Kushner explained that it may be possible but it’s not probable because the approved permit is good only for the specific conditions/representations of the Montessori School (i.e., hours of operation, specific program, number of students). Mr. Starr noted that a school in this location is not an as-of-right use and added that any new school would have to apply for special exception approval.
Mr. Kushner noted that the subject approval is not a blanket approval for any school, it is just for the Montessori School.
In response to Ms. Keith’s question, Mr. Kushner explained that if another school came forward, proposed to rent the space at 150 Fisher Drive, and proposed to operate their school in exactly the same manner that the Montessori School currently operates with all the same criteria it would be permitted. Ms. Keith commented that if everything was the same it wouldn’t be an issue. Mr. Kushner concurred.
There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4566 was closed.
App. #4567- Avon Properties, LLC, owner, Ready Imaging, Inc., applicant, request for Special Exception under Sections VII.C.4.b.(1) and (5) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit refacing of detached and gas price signs, 80 East Main Street, Parcel 2140080 in a CS Zone.
Present was Al Whiting, applicant.
Mr. Starr commented that the existing Sunoco gas station is changing to Exxon so all the signs and associated colors are proposed to be changed. Mr. Whiting concurred and noted that he would be doing the rebranding. He explained that the site was originally an Exxon and his company changed it to Sunoco some years ago. He noted that the plastic Sunoco letters on the canopy fascia would be replaced with smaller Exxon letters and the existing monument sign would be refaced with Exxon, no change to the size. All the gas dispensers would remain and changed to Exxon.
In response to Ms. Keith’s question, Mr. Whiting explained that the lighting for the detached sign would remain the same; the only change would be the addition of the street number to the top of the sign, required under the Zoning Regulations.
There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4567 was closed.
App. #4568- Lexham Avon, LLC, owner, Artfx Signs, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VII.C.4.b.(2) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit low-profile detached sign, 339 West Main Street, Parcel 4540339 in a CR Zone.
Present to represent this application was Lawrin Rosen, applicant, Artfx Signs.
Mr. Rosen noted that the proposal is for a double-sided ground sign and an illuminated wall sign.
Mr. Starr noted that the street number for the detached sign is shown with 5-inch high numbers and added that the Zoning Regulations require 9-inch high numbers to be readily visible by motorists. Mr. Rosen noted his understanding and added that he feels 9-inch high numbers would be too much for the proposed design. He commented that it is his feeling that with the high contrast sign design the numbers, at 5 inches, would be legible from the road. He added that he feels numbers at 9 inches high would become the largest item/focus of the sign. Mr. Starr commented that large numbers are preferred for public safety reasons. Mr. Rosen noted his understanding and added that he would make the sign to meet the Commission’s preference and added that the smaller numbers are more of a design
consideration.
Mr. Starr asked if the proposed wall sign has lit panels and noted that he doesn’t want the building to look like a car dealership. Mr. Rosen confirmed that the proposal is for individual channel letters with LED lights inside. The Hartford Hospital letters would be black during the day and light up in off white at night; the logo would light up according to the color scheme. He noted that front-lit letters were chosen over halo-style letters to better match the construction of the building.
In response to Ms Keith’s question, Mr. Rosen addressed lighting for the monument sign and noted that the sign would be made of aluminum plate and the letters would be cut into the plate to reveal the light source from within. The letters (Hartford Hospital Family Health Center) would be infilled with acrylic that has a day/night type of material; the letters would be black during the day and an off white at night. The background is opaque. Ms. Keith commented that she feels the street number needs to be the correct size, especially since this business is new.
Mr. Cappello commented that he thinks the proposed sign is fine as is. Mr. Rosen commented that the general rule of thumb for most towns is a 5 inch to 6 inch street number; Avon’s requirement of 9 inches is somewhat unusual.
There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4568 was closed, as well as the entire public hearing.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Mrs. Griffin motioned to waive Administrative Procedure #6 and consider Apps. #4559, #4560, #4566, #4567, and #4568. Ms. Keith seconded the motion that received unanimous approval.
App. #4566 - Avon Park North 150 Associates, LLC, owner, Farmington Valley Academy Montessori, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VI.G.3.e. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit unlimited extension for Montessori school use, 150 Fisher Drive, Parcel 2280150, in an IP Zone
Ms. Keith motioned to approve App. #4566. The motion, seconded by Mr. Thompson, received unanimous approval.
App. #4567- Avon Properties, LLC, owner, Ready Imaging, Inc., applicant, request for Special Exception under Sections VII.C.4.b.(1) and (5) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit refacing of detached and gas price signs, 80 East Main Street, Parcel 2140080 in a CS Zone.
Mr. Thompson motioned to approve App. #4567. The motion, seconded by Mr. Mahoney, received unanimous approval.
App. #4568- Lexham Avon, LLC, owner, Artfx Signs, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VII.C.4.b.(2) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit low-profile detached sign, 339 West Main Street, Parcel 4540339 in a CR Zone.
Mrs. Griffin motioned to approve App. #4568 subject to the following condition:
1. The street address on top of the sign shall contain numbers that are 9 inches in height.
The motion, seconded by Ms. Keith, received approval from Mesdames Griffin and Keith and Messrs. Starr and Bonner. Voting in opposition of approval were Messrs. Thompson, Cappello, and Mahoney.
App. #4559 - Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Site Plan Approval to construct new pavilion, multi-use fields, and parking lot expansion and renovation, Fisher Meadows Park, 800 Old Farms Road, Parcel 3360800, in an ROS Zone
App. #4560 - Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section III.G.4.a of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit activities in the floodplain/ floodway for expansion to Fisher Meadows Park, 800 Old Farms Road, Parcel 3360800, in an ROS Zone
Ms. Keith motioned to approve Apps. #4559 and #4560 subject to the following condition:
1. The road shoulder area along the north side of Old Farms Road shall be permanently marked as “no parking”.
The motion, seconded by Mrs. Griffin received approval from Mesdames Keith and Griffin and Messrs. Starr, Thompson, Cappello, and Bonner. Mr. Mahoney voted in opposition to approve Apps. #4559 and #4560.
NEW APPLICATIONS
App. #4569- OAVX Associates, LLC, owner, DaCapo Ristorante, applicant, request for
Site Plan Modification to permit reconfigured seating plan for both indoor and outdoor dining, 5 East Main Street, Parcel 2140001 in a CS Zone.
Present was Michael Boe, Boe Studio, representing the applicant.
Mr. Boe explained that the request is for a redistribution of seating, both indoor and outdoor. The original approval was for 124 indoor seats and 64 outdoor seats. The outdoor seating has been reduced to 52 seats (down 12) and the indoor seating has been increased to 129 seats (up 5) Mr. Boe noted that these changes are the result of discussions and concerns by the Fire Marshal.
Mr. Kushner explained that the changes from the Commission’s perspective are modest but noted that there was much discussion between Mr. Boe and the Fire Marshal and Building Official relative to Building and Fire Code issues. He noted that the original approval was not granted solely on the number of seats, as would normally occur with a standalone restaurant. The seating approval for DaCapo was approved in the context of Old Avon Village, in its entirety; a 14% parking reduction was approved as part of the original approval.
Mr. Kushner noted that while some restaurant patrons may not be able to find a parking space right next to the front door, there is plenty of parking in Old Avon Village at night when many of the businesses are closed.
Mr. Boe stated that final inspections have been done by the Building Official, the Fire Marshal, and the Farmington Valley Health District.
In response to Mrs. Griffin’s question, Mr. Kushner explained that the construction of the outdoor dining area, now complete, has no impact on available parking. He clarified that while there aren’t a huge number of parking spaces in the immediate vicinity of the restaurant there are plenty of available parking spaces on the Old Avon Village site.
Mr. Cappello motioned to approve App. #4569. The motion, seconded by Mr. Mahoney, received unanimous approval.
App. #4570 - Fred & Bonnie, LLC owner/applicant, request for Site Plan Modification for changes to existing and proposed buildings and site layout, 221 West Main Street, Parcel 4540221, in a CR Zone
Present to represent this application were Robert Meyers, representing the applicant; David Whitney, PE, Consulting Engineers, LLC; Peter Wells, architect, Tuthill & Wells; and Fred Bauer, owner.
Attorney Meyers explained that all the requested land-use modifications point in a positive direction; less building square footage and less impervious coverage are proposed. He noted that the 4 interconnections required for the properties located on either side of the subject site remain the same. The pedestrian access to Big Y has been relocated slightly to the south to make it more convenient to get behind the “garage” located at the former Dakota restaurant site. Mr. Meyers noted that no proposed changes would adversely affect any neighbors.
Mr. Whitney displayed a color-coded site plan to highlight the proposed changes from the previously approved plan. He noted that the existing front building (currently occupied by a nail salon) has a footprint of approximately 1,000 square feet with a total square footage of 1,500 square feet. He explained that part of the existing front building would be removed with a proposal to add a larger addition for a net increase of approximately 264 square feet and a total square footage of 1,816 square feet. The rear building (3-bay oil change area, 4-bay auto detailing center, customer lounge and storage) has been reduced in size by approximately 630 square feet. He noted that 6 parking spaces have been added (to what was originally approved) for a total of 38 spaces; the utilities remain the same and
the buildings would be served by public sewer. The front building is currently served by a well but would be converted to public water; the rear building is already served by public water.
Mr. Meyers explained that an application to the Zoning Board of Appeals is needed for a side yard variance and, therefore, no action can be taken tonight. Parking has been added to the front of the site to provide a higher number of “convenient” parking spaces. He noted that, now, both buildings, independently, meet the parking requirements contained in the Zoning Regulations. There is one handicap parking space for each building and another foot of snow shelf has been added along the fenced area.
Mr. Wells displayed elevations of the site and noted that the building roofs would be dark brown in color. He noted that improvements have been made to the building façade that faces Route 44; these improvements are over and above what was originally approved. He indicated that much of the proposed building details/dimensions remain essentially the same as the original approval.
Mr. Starr commented that, in conjunction with the long-term Plan of Conservation and Development, the Commission would like to add sidewalks along Route 44; he noted that the request is for the applicant to construct a 5-foot-wide segment of sidewalk along the frontage of the building. He noted that it is understood that the sidewalk may not connect to anything initially but it would be a start.
Mr. Meyers noted his understanding of Mr. Starr’s request for sidewalks but requested that such a condition, if an approval is granted, be written in a way that acknowledges that the applicant does not have control over what’s permitted in the State right-of-way. He noted that if the State doesn’t want the sidewalk on their property, the applicant would construct it on their own property, adjacent to the State right-of-way.
Ms. Keith asked if the proposal to add 6 spaces would be adequate should a restaurant occupy the front building. Mr. Meyers explained that the proposed parking meets the requirements of the Zoning Regulations and added that the applicant doesn’t know, at this time, whether or not a restaurant would occupy that space. Mr. Kushner noted that it would be a small restaurant, Class I under 2,000 square feet. Ms. Keith noted her understanding.
Mr. Kushner explained that Mr. Bauer must appear before the Zoning Board of Appeals to request a variance and asked whether the Commission feels the proposed changes comply with the Zoning Regulations and, in turn, endorse the proposed changes to the approved plan. The Commission indicated their endorsement of the proposed changes.
In response to Ms. Keith’s question, Mr. Meyers explained that the signage for the site was approved with the original application and noted that there is no request to change it. Mr. Meyers added that it is his understanding that once a sign is approved the content can be changed without asking for reapproval. Ms. Keith conveyed her understanding.
Ms. Keith motioned to table App. #4570 to the next meeting, scheduled for October 18. The motion, seconded by Mr. Mahoney, received unanimous approval.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:05 pm.
Mr. Thompson motioned for the Commission to enter into Executive Session. The motion, seconded by Mrs. Griffin, received unanimous approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Sadlon, Clerk
LEGAL NOTICE
TOWN OF AVON
At a meeting held on September 27, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon voted as follows:
App. #4559 Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Site Plan Approval to construct new pavilion, multi-use fields, and parking lot expansion and renovation, Fisher Meadows Park, 800 Old Farms Road, Parcel 3360800, in an ROS Zone APPROVED WITH CONDITION
App. #4560 Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section III.G.4.a of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit activities in the floodplain/ floodway for expansion to Fisher Meadows Park, 800 Old Farms Road, Parcel 3360800, in an ROS Zone APPROVED WITH CONDITION
App. #4566 Avon Park North 150 Associates, LLC, owner, Farmington Valley Academy Montessori, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VI.G.3.e. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit unlimited extension for Montessori school use, 150 Fisher Drive, Parcel 2280150, in an IP Zone APPROVED
App. #4567 Avon Properties, LLC, owner, Ready Imaging, Inc., applicant, request for Special Exception under Sections VII.C.4.b.(1) and (5) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit refacing of detached and gas price signs, 80 East Main Street, Parcel 2140080 in a CS Zone APPROVED
App. #4568 Lexham Avon, LLC, owner, Artfx Signs, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VII.C.4.b.(2) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit low-profile detached sign, 339 West Main Street, Parcel 4540339 in a CR Zone APPROVED WITH CONDITION
App. #4569 OAVX Associates, LLC, owner, DaCapo Ristorante, applicant, request for Site Plan Modification to permit reconfigured seating plan for both indoor and outdoor dining, 5 East Main Street, Parcel 2140001 in a CS Zone APPROVED
Dated at Avon this 28th day of September, 2011. Copy of this notice is on file in the Office of the Town Clerk, Avon Town Hall.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Duane Starr, Chairman
Douglas Thompson, Vice-Chairman/Secretary
LEGAL NOTICE
TOWN OF AVON
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday, October 18, 2011, at 7:30 P. M. at the Avon Senior Center:
App. #4571 Old Avon Realty, LLC, owner, Capitol Region Education Council, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section IV.A.4.b. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit public school, 59 Waterville Road, Parcel 4500059, in an RU2A Zone.
All interested persons may appear and be heard and written communications will be received. Applications are available for inspection in Planning and Community Development at the Avon Town Hall. Dated at Avon this 3rd day of October, 2011.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Duane Starr, Chairman
Douglas Thompson, Vice-Chairman/Secretary
| 
