MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Robert Warren, Marjorie Anthony, Thomas Berstene, and Stephen Wagner
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Paul Oates sitting for Terri Dickey-Gaignat
Sandi Jeski sitting for Marge Anthony on appl. #2597-03
Chairperson Warren called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The Recording Secretary read the legal notice as published in the newspaper.
Appl. #2592-03 – Saczawa Partnership, c/o Ellen S. Andrulat, 1370 Main Street, request for five variances to section 10.2: 1) minimum parcel area for parcels 1 and 2: 18,982 square feet proposed for parcel 1 and 17,585 square feet proposed for parcel 2 (five acres required); 2) minimum lot frontage: parcel 1 – 104.33 feet and parcel 2 – 95.53 feet (150 feet required); 3) maximum impervious coverage: parcel 2 – 82.1% (65% allowed); 4) minimum front yard: parcel 1 – 25.1 feet provided and parcel 2 – 30.3 feet provided (50 feet required); and 5) minimum side yard: parcel 1 – 14.6 feet proposed and parcel 2 – 10.4 (20 feet required), for property at 253 & 255 Chapel Road, I-291 Corridor Development zone.
Mr. Peter DeMallie from Design Professionals came before the Commission to represent this application. He explained the variances that are being requested. The following is a lit of items or circumstances that directly relate to the property. Some items create hardships and other items are reasons the applicant feels this application should be approved:
Each building is separately operated.
The only site improvements necessary are new dumpster pads and striping of the parking lots.
Approval of this application would not alter the view of this site.
The site was previously zoned industrial. The property conforms to virtually all industrial zone requirements.
The site pre-dates the establishment of I-291 corridor.
Both parcels can support parking and conform with the parking requirements of the CD zone without additional pavement.
The parcel as it exists presently is non-conforming.
Parcel two requires the impervious coverage proposed in order to operate properly.
Neither building can be moved.
Approval of this application will allow the buildings to be sold to the existing tenants. Both tenants would like to do improvements to their facility.
Other parcels along Chapel Road are non-conforming.
Both buildings are connected to public water and public sewers.
Chapel Road had been widened, therefore reducing the parcel size and front yard setbacks.
A letter from Mr. Jim Cooper of Fluid Dynamics was submitted to the Commission. This letter is in support of this application (Attachment A).
Mr. Robert Star of 621 Main Street came before the Commission to speak in favor of this application. He stated that by splitting the properties, it would keep two businesses in Town.
Mr. Ron Cloutier and Mr. Keven Cloutier came before the Commission to speak in favor of this application. Mr. Ron Cloutier explained that their business has been at 253 Chapel Road for 34 years and he would like to purchase the building.
Mr. Kevin Foley of 498 Main Street stated that he hopes the Board will allow the property to be subdivided and feels with the improvements there will be nothing but a benefit to Chapel Road.
Mr. Edward Kasheta stated he hopes the Board will pass this application.
No one from the public spoke in opposition to this appeal.
Answering questions from the Board, Mr. DeMallie explained that the impervious coverage for building #2 is a pre-existing condition. The property was in conformity prior to the taking of land by the State for the widening of Chapel Road. The only changes that would take place would be a dumpster and pad with screening. Improvements such as landscaping and building facades would be done by the owners of the property once they take title. If this application were not approved, the owner would like to sell the property and it is very hard to sell when there are two buildings on one parcel, therefore there would be a land lord situation. It is assumed that if the application was not approved, the businesses would probably run as they are now. This application, if approved, would have to go
through subdivision approval and if there are any requirements for landscaping, it could be addressed by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
With no further questions, the public participation portion of this appeal closed at 8:10 p.m.
Appl. #2593-03 – Elizabeth Anargiro and Elissa Johanson, request for a variance to section 11.2 to allow a residential dwelling without a garage, at property located at 453 Griffin Road, A-20 zone.
Ms. Elissa Johanson came before the Commission representing this application. She explained that she is requesting a variance so the attached garage could be converted into a family room and not have a garage for the period of five years. The neighbor to the west does not have a garage.
No one from the public spoke in favor or opposition to this appeal.
Answering questions from the Commission, Ms. Johanson explained that the proposed garage would be next to the shed. The current garage door would be eliminated and a picture window would be in place of it. The existing house has a kitchen, living room and dining room. Putting a family room onto the house would greatly increase the value of the house.
With no further questions, the public participation portion of this appeal closed at 8:13 p.m.
Appl. #2594-03 – LMJ Cafes, LLC, request for a variance to section 5.1.2 to allow two pool tables (billiard halls allowed in GC zone only ) at 465 Buckland Road, center unit, RC zone.
Mr. Jeff Squillante came before the Board to present this application. Mr. Squillante explained that he operates a restaurant on 465 Buckland Road which is called The Big Tomato. When redesigning the restaurant, it was decided to try to bring new customers into the restaurant by incorporating two pool tables. It was later discovered that the pool tables are not allowed in the restricted commercial zone. The business is small and a variance would be necessary in order to keep the pool tables.
No one from the public spoke in favor or opposition to this appeal.
Answering questions from the Board, Mr. Squillante explained that the liquor license is a full restaurant license. The bar has been extended and allows approximately thirteen bar stools, and there is seating for forty at the tables. It is hoped that the pool tables would create entertainment for the existing customers and also bring in a new customer base. Since the restaurant opened, 85% to 90% of the sales have been through food. Our intention is to do food with a mix of bar business but predominately the sales will be from food. Presently there are televisions in the restaurant.
Michele Lipe, Assistant Director of Planning explained that there were several options in the way this could have been handled. The following is a list:
An amendment to the regulations to allow something other than what is listed in the permitted uses to be something that would include pool tables.
In the regulations there is “Special Exception Uses” which was explored, (see section 5.1.2.9.3).
This variance would stay with the building that has requested it, not with the business.
With no further questions, the public participation portion of this appeal closed at 8:35 p.m.
4. Appl. #2595-03 – Kasheta Farms, Inc., 1275 John Fitch Boulevard , request for a a 7’ variance to section 10.2 to allow a building addition 3’ from the side property line (10’ required) at 1275 and 1287 John Fitch Boulevard, I zone.
Mr. Peter DeMallie from Design Professionals came before the Commission to represent this application. Mr. DeMallie explained that the existing building has been there since 1959. There was a variance granted by ZBA to allow the building 3’ away from the property line. Kasheta Farms would like to relocate their existing business from Governors Highway to this location. They would like to extend the existing building. The addition would consist of 3,300 square feet. The following is a list of items that are felt to be the exceptional difficulties, or reasons the applicant feels this application should be approved:
Pre-dates zoning requirements.
Consistent with the prior variance that was granted in February, 1966.
The proposed addition will follow the established northerly and southerly façade line of the existing building.
The proposed addition will blend with the existing building.
Nassau’s Furniture is a minimum of 40’ away from the north property line.
The proposed addition will not be visible from John Fitch Boulevard because the existing building will block the view.
The proposed addition is necessary to accommodate the operations for Kasheta Farms.
The building can not be moved without disrupting vehicular movement or yard operations for Kasheta Farms, Inc. and their tenants.
It would be much safer for this building to be built the way it is proposed.
The proposed building addition is well suited to the requirements.
There is not any other reasonable location for the proposed addition.
It is more efficient for Kasheta Farms to construct the addition.
The proposed building addition will add to the economic base of the Town of South Windsor.
The proposed addition will not have any impact on neighboring enterprises.
The proposed addition will be serviced by public sewer and public water.
There is substantial vegetative buffer between the proposed building and the properties to the rear.
The proposed building addition is more than 190’ from the rear property line.
The properties north, south and west of this property are all zoned industrial.
It is believed that this building conforms to all other zoning requirements of the Town of South Windsor.
This application will need site plan approval by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
There were six letters submitted that were in support of this application (Attachments B, C, D, E, F & G).
Mr. Kevin Foley from 498 Main Street came before the Board and spoke in support to this application.
No one from the public spoke in opposition to this appeal.
Answering questions from the Board, Mr. DeMallie confirmed that the addition is larger than the existing building.
Mr. Edward Kasheta, President of Kasheta Farms, Inc. came before the Board. He explained that the problem the company ran into on Governors Highway was that the residential neighbors were being disrupted. The plan that is being presented tonight is felt to be the most prudent and feasible plan.
Mr. DeMallie told Board members that other areas on the site were considered for the construction of the addition. In the rear there is a very shallow pitch so the utilities could not be placed there. There was also a desire to be able to walk from one building on the site to another with ease. A jog in the building was also considered, but there was a safety concern because the jog would obstruct view of operations. Mr. Kasheta also added that with Precision doing emission testing, the traffic in the area would be greater. Having a jog in the building could create a dangerous situation with all the vehicular movement on the property.
With no further questions, the public participation portion of this appeal closed at 8:50 p.m.
Appl. #2597-03 – Anne T. Keen, 22-3 Arthur Drive, request for two variances to section 10.2: 1) a 5,461 square foot variance to allow a lot with 34,539 square feet (40,000 square feet required); and 2) a 1’ variance to allow a front yard 49’ (50’ required) at 140 Pleasant Valley Road, A-40 zone.
Commissioner Anthony abstained from this application. Commissioner Jeski sat in her place.
Mr. Peter DeMallie from Design Professionals came before the Board to represent this application. He stated that in July the Zoning Board of Appeals granted to Mrs. Keen several variances to allow the lot to be split into two lots. A boundary survey was done and a subdivision application was submitted to the IWA/CC and Planning & Zoning Commission. During the Town’s approval process it was discovered that the right of way for Pleasant Valley Road does not meet Town standards, it is approximately 40 feet instead of 50 feet. This has caused the front property line to be moved closer to the house, therefore causing the variance for the front yard and the lot area to need a larger variance.
No one from the public spoke in favor or opposition to this appeal.
Answering questions from the Board, Mr. DeMallie explained that the variances being requested are only for the existing residence. There has been a slight variation to the common lot line in order to minimize the variance requests required.
With no further questions, the public participation portion of this appeal closed at 9:11 p.m.
Appl. #2596-03 – John J. Mitchell, 1209 Sullivan Avenue, request for six variances: 1) a modification to a prior ZBA approval dated 9/2/76 to allow 5 oil trucks (2 oils trucks allowed), 7 service trucks (2 service trucks allowed), existing fuel oil storage tanks to remain, and a 4 bay garage addition; 2) a 50’ variance to section 4.3.10 to eliminate buffer (50’ required); 3) a 10’ variance to section 10.4a to allow a 40’ buffer along the west property line (50’ required), and a 40’ variance to allow a 10’ buffer along the north property line (50’ required); 4) a variance to section 3.A.2a to allow 2 driveways on subject property (1 driveway allowed); 5) a variance to section 3.10.7 to allow extension of a non-conforming use;
and 6) a variance to section 4.3 to allow a second house on a lot (1 house allowed) at 1199/1209 Sullivan Avenue, A-20 zone.
Mr. Peter DeMallie from Design Professionals, Inc. came before the Board to represent this application. He explained that the subject property is approximately 2 acres. When Mr. Mitchell bought this property he was granted a variance by this Commission for the present use, and there was a restriction put in place on the number of vehicles on the site. Presently, there are a number of curb cuts or driveway entrances and with this application there is a proposal to eliminate two curb cuts. There would be a shared driveway for Mitchell Fuel and a Senior Residence Condominium, which will be landscaped. Parking for Mitchell Fuel will be relocated to the front. There is a house on the property to the south, Mr. Mitchell would like to relocate that house onto his property. Mr. DeMallie
withdrew the variance requesting a 10’ variance to section 10.4.a to allow a 40’ buffer along the west property line and a 40’ variance to allow a 10’ buffer along the north property line. It is necessary to have a buffer on the south side for the senior residence development. Since the approval from 1976, IRS regulations have changed so they would like to have separate vehicles for all their different products. Homeland security is also an issue. Four more bays will need to be constructed because they will need to lock up all the trucks that carry fuel at night for security reasons. There are currently seven vehicles used for service but only two are left on the site overnight.
Mr. Richard Boston a Licensed Landscape Architect came before the Commission and explained the different landscaping that is proposed on the site.
Ms. Margaret Shea of 266 Abbe Road came before the Commission to speak in favor of this appeal. She stated the because of the new government regulations, it is necessary for Mitchell Fuel to increase the number of vehicles used for service. Mitchell Fuel is a top quality business and I hope the Commission looks favorably upon this request.
Mr. Walter Mealy of 111 Dogwood Lane came before the Commission to speak in favor of this appeal. He felt that the hardship on this property is zoning itself because historically this property had been used for commercial uses. Outside forces such as the IRS and Homeland Security affect this application and therefore should be approved.
Mr. Paul Roulier of 1180 Strong Road came before the Commission to speak in opposition to this appeal. Mr. Roulier stated that the limitation placed on this site back in 1976 have not been adhered to. The shared buffer could cause difficulties when either property is owned by another party than the ones involved. The house that they are requesting to be moved to this site will just further crammed the lot. The justification of Homeland Security being used to need four additional bays is not necessary. A security gate could be used in place of an addition.
Mr. Mark Millward of 1200 Strong Road came before the Commission to speak in opposition to this appeal. Mr. Millward stated that five fuel trucks are not necessary for this operation. Diesel fuel or fuel oil is the same product. Home heating oil is dyed for non-taxable use. The buffer around the property should at least stay the same with the increase of this operation.
Mr. Mitchell, owner of Mitchell Fuel came before the Commission to clarify concerns made by Mr. Millward. He explained that he owns four oil trucks. There have been two service trucks parked in the yard. Usually, the service trucks go home with the service technicians, but presently there are two vacancies that need to be filled. The tanks were on the property prior to the time of purchase, and have been upgraded. Monitoring devices have been installed to alarm in case there are any leaks. Mr. Mitchell explained the different products that can be purchased by their customers. He also explained the necessity to be requesting more oil trucks. The dyed products can not go into the diesel trucks.
Mr. DeMallie stated that the additional garage space is not only for security, but it is felt that aesthetically it would be nicer to have the bays instead of just installing a chained link fence. The applicant wishes to have the trucks out of public view.
Answering questions from the Board, Mr. DeMallie explained that the buffer will only be necessary on the Mitchell property if the Senior Residence Development is approved. The Senior Residence Development is required to have a buffer around the entire perimeter.
The Senior Residence Development will have less than 20 units. It will share a driveway with Mitchell Fuel. There will also be a shared driveway for the existing house and the house proposed to be moved onto this site. The goal for Access Management is to eliminate as many driveways as possible and have shared access wherever possible on Sullivan Avenue and Buckland Road corridor. At the time of application, the driveway access for the Senior Residence Development will be required to have a traffic study done and will be subject to State approval. A driveway across the rear of the Mitchell property is not feasible because there is propane servicing done there and the septic system is back there.
Michele Lipe, Assistant Director of Planning told Board members that if they are inclined to approve this application, a condition could be placed on it stating that approval is based upon the map submitted by Design Professionals, and the date of the map.
Mr. DeMallie explained that the Mitchell Fuel property could not be split without a variance from this Board. There is no regulation regarding impervious coverage for the A-20 zone, with the exception of some uses. The two garages on the site are both proposed to be 624 square feet. The underground storage tanks will not be removed from this site, they were upgraded in 1987. There is another tank which is used for home heating oil which services 1199 Sullivan Avenue. This tank was replaced over 30 years ago. The barn on this site will be taken down and the house from 1235 Sullivan Avenue would be relocated to that location.
Michele Lipe, Assistant Director of Planning suggested that when the Commission is ready to make decisions on this application, they should take each request separately.
After a short discussion, it was decided to keep this hearing open in order to discuss this application further.
With no further questions, the public participation portion of this appeal closed at 10:15 p.m.
Motion to: hold the public hearing open for appl. #2595-03 – John J. Mitchell, 1199/1209 Sullivan Avenue, A-20 zone.
Was made by Commissioner Berstene
Seconded by Commissioner Anthony
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows: unanimous
Deliberative Session
ITEM: Appl. #2597-03 – Anne T. Keen, 140 Pleasant Valley Road, A-40 zone
Motion to: approve appl. #2597-03 – Anne T. Keen, 22-3 Arthur Drive, two variances to section 10.2: 1) a 5,461 square foot variance to allow a lot with 34,539 square feet; and 2) a 1’ variance to allow a front yard 49’ (50’ required) at 140 Pleasant Valley Road, A-40 zone.
Was made by Commissioner Jeski
Seconded by Commissioner Oates
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows: unanimous
Hardship
1. The way the original lot was designed created the necessity for a variance.
2. The subdivision regulations requires the Town right of way to increase resulting in a change to the front property line and area of the lot.
ITEM: Appl. #2593-03 – Elizabeth Anargiro and Elissa Johanson, 453 Griffin Road, A-20 zone
Motion to: approve appl. #2593-03 – Elizabeth Anargiro and Elissa Johanson, a variance to section 11.2 to allow a residential dwelling without a garage, at property located at 453 Griffin Road, A-20 zone.
Was made by Commissioner Anthony
After a lengthy discussion regarding the applicants hardship, it was decided by the Commission to discuss this further at the next scheduled meeting.
Motion to: table action on appl. #2593-03 – Elizabeth Anargiro and Elissa Johanson, a variance to section 11.2 to allow a residential dwelling without a garage, at property located at 453 Griffin Road, A-20 zone.
Was made by Commissioner Anthony
Seconded by Commissioner Berstene
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows: unanimous
ITEM: Appl. #2595-03 – Kasheta Farms, Inc., 1287 John Fitch Boulevard, I zone
Motion to: approve appl. #2595-03 – Kasheta Farms, Inc., 1275 John Fitch Boulevard, a 7’ variance to section 10.2 to allow a building addition 3’ from the side property line at 1275 and 1287 John Fitch Boulevard, I zone.
Was made by Commissioner Wagner
Seconded by Commissioner Anthony
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows: unanimous
Hardship:
The continuation of a straight building line is the only safe option in regards to vehicular movement on the property.
Pre-dates the zoning regulations.
ITEM: Adjournment
Motion to: adjourn the meeting at 11:25 p.m.
Was made by Commissioner Berstene
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows
________________________________
Deborah W. Reid, Recording Secretary
Zoning Board of Appeals
| 
