TOWN OF EAST WINDSOR - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING
NOVEMBER 30, 2010
The East Windsor Zoning Board of Appeals held a Special Meeting on Monday, November 30, 2010 at the East Windsor Town Hall, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, Connecticut. The following members were present: Regular Members Tom Arcari, José Giner and Stan Paleski and Alternate Member Dan Noble.
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Chairman Tom Arcari.
ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
A quorum was established, as three regular members and one alternate were present.
CONTINUED HEARING:
ZBA #2010-05 – Application of Bushnell Associates LLC for property located at 171 Main Street, East Windsor, owned by Chestnut Point Realty, for a variance of Section 401 Bulk & Area Requirements – Residential District (maximum lot coverage); Section 601.3 Parking Lot Design; (Off street parking dimensional and setback requirements) and Section 604 Refuse Storage (Setback requirements) to allow an additional parking area and refuse storage area. [R-1 zone]
Representing the applicant was Attorney Jonathan M. Starble. Also present was Trudy Coscina, Administrator for Chestnut Point. Atty. Starble said there were some questions raised at a previous meeting by neighbors and he wanted to address the issues. One of the neighbors, Mr. Schouldice, had concerns about additional lighting in the area. Atty. Starble explained that any new lighting would be cut-off lighting. He said they looked to see what kind of impact the existing lighting has on Mr. Schouldice’s property, which is across the street. Atty. Starble presented some aerial photos of the area that show where the existing lights are on the property and where the streetlights are. He pointed out the Shouldice property and noted that they are getting light from the streetlights
and not from Chestnut Point.
Atty. Starble said that another neighbor, Mr. Johnson, who is an abutter, said at a previous meeting that Chestnut Point was a good neighbor but he had some concerns. Atty. Starble referred to a letter from Mr. Johnson to Trudy Coscina at Chestnut Point dated October 28, 2010, which he read into the record. The letter stated, in part: “1) I wish to be able to maintain my fence without hindrance, and without any materials or items being placed against or adjacent to it; 2) I wish to be able to continue to have walking access from my fence gate to the Town Lot; and 3) I am concerned that the parking area might eventually have vehicles or other structures, such as campers, trailers, motorcycles, etc., left in the lot, or that it would be used in some way other than strictly for parking of on-duty
personnel and visitors.” The letter went on to say that with reference to the easement and use restriction deed of October 1992, Mr. Johnson had no wish to exercise his option if his 3 concerns were met. Atty. Starble said that the first two issues are design issues, which they will address, and the third is a zoning enforcement issue.
Atty. Starble said there is another abutter, the Daigles, who are directly abutting this property on Spring Street and they had contacted him. He said Mr. Daigle was concerned about increased traffic on the parcel and a devaluation of his property. Atty. Starble said there is not going to be more activity or traffic on the property. There will now be a spot for parking.
Atty. Starble said he wanted to address the issue of hardship. He said there are regulations that are imposed on nursing homes and there is a moratorium on beds in Connecticut. He said this facility is not allowed to add more beds. There are 60 beds now and that is all they are allowed to have. He noted that it is already a pre-existing nonconforming situation for lot coverage. It is also a valid nonconforming situation for parking. They will become less nonconforming by doing this. Atty. Starble explained that Section 601.2 of the Zoning Regulations requires one parking spot per three beds plus one spot per employee per shift. On the highest shift they would need 20 spaces to accommodate visitors and over 30 spaces for the employees. He said they don’t have
enough spots to accommodate one spot per 3 beds let alone parking for the employees. There is a hardship.
Atty. Starble indicated that there was a suggestion raised by Mr. Burnham at a previous meeting about possibly purchasing adjacent property from the town. He said they have had some discussion about it that may or may not lead to something. He said there might be some objection by the neighbors if they did that.
Mr. Noble asked where the employees are parking now. Ms. Coscina answered that they are parking on the grass and on the street. She said winter is particularly tough.
Mr. Arcari opened up the hearing to the public. No one came forward to speak.
MOTION: To close the hearing on ZBA #2010-05. Paleski / Noble / Unanimous
MOTION: To approve ZBA #2010-05 subject to conformance with the plans submitted for the record. Giner / Paleski / Unanimous
Mr. Giner said the regulations are there to protect the neighbors. He felt that the neighbors are satisfied that the concerns have been met. There is an existing nonconformity with respect to parking. This makes the situation more conforming. It will take cars off the street and might actually help the neighbors. Mr. Arcari said they are going to park there anyway. This will make it safer. Mr. Paleski said they have been around for some time. It is definitely a nonconforming lot. He felt that the applicant has tried to meet Mr. Johnson’s concerns. They will be putting in cut-off lighting. He said it’s better to have the paved parking. Mr. Noble said the present parking is on grass and they will be parking there anyway. We have more
say in what kind of lighting goes there.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Mr. Paleski read a letter of resignation from Chris Davis.
Election of Secretary:
It was suggested that they do the whole list of officers at the January meeting. It was also suggested that the by-laws be amended to be clearer regarding the election of officers. It presently states that officers be elected “by a majority vote of regular members.”
MOTION: To table the election of officers until the January 3, 2011 meeting.
Paleski / Giner Unanimous
2011 Meeting Schedule:
MOTION: To approve the 2011 meeting schedule as presented.
Giner / Arcari / Unanimous
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
MOTION: To approve the minutes of November 1, 2010.
Giner / Paleski / Unanimous
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION: To adjourn. Paleski / Noble / Unanimous
The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Marlene Bauer
Recording Secretary
| 
