MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Thomas Berstene, Teri Dickey-Gaignat, Stephen Wagner, and Sandy Jeski
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Daniel Gentile sitting for Lavina Wilson
Chairperson Berstene called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
ITEM: New Business
Appl. #2674-06 – Michael Bedell, 239 Graham Road (Our Savior Church), A-20 zone
This application was withdrawn, (see attachment A).
Appl. #2683-06 – Jon D. Berman & Frank W. Russo, 819 Clark Street, RC zone
Mr. Peter DeMallie from Design Professionals, Inc. came before the Commission representing John D. Berman and Frank W. Russo. He explained that in 1989 the property had been surveyed incorrectly and instead of having the correct frontage of 18.5 feet, it was recorded at 19.7 feet. The request before the Commission is to allow the building to remain at 18.5’ from the property line.
No one from the public spoke in favor or opposition to this appeal.
Answering questions from the Commission, Mr. DeMallie explained that Design Professionals, Inc. was requested to do an updated survey of the property. When the survey was performed, this error was found. The building was nonconforming in 1989, but part of the original building was in front of the building line at that time.
With no further questions, the public participation portion and public hearing of this appeal closed at 7:17 p.m.
Appl. #2685-06 – Connecticut Valley Properties of South Windsor, 1678 and 1700 Ellington Road, RC zone
Mr. Peter DeMallie from Design Professionals, Inc. came before the Commission to represent Connecticut Valley Properties of South Windsor. Mr. DeMallie explained that this request is on two separate properties owned by one individual. At 1678 Ellington Road, there is an existing building that is fully occupied. At 1700 Ellington Road, there is an existing building that is up to the front property line. The applicant would like to create a mixed use development on these two parcels. The development would consist of commercial uses on the first floor and having condo’s or apartment’s on the second floor. The idea would be to have landscaping in the front and have parking in the interior of the development.
Mr. David Holmes of Capital Studio Architects, LLC came before the Board to explain the concept that has been envisioned for these two sites. The idea is to create a village theme. There is 5,600 square feet of existing building and 25,000 square feet that is being requested for new development. This development would consist of 1/3 retail, 1/3 office, 1/3 medical office and 10-12 apartment units. Parking is adequate to meet the needs of this type of
development. Mr. Holmes explained the architectural design of this plan. The existing building on the property has problems architecturally and will need to be taken down and reconstructed.
Mr. DeMallie stated that Mr. Holmes would like to create a traditional/pedestrian environment. The parking will be in the center of the development. There is one driveway for both parcels which is in accordance with access management. Both lots together will bring the acreage into conformity. Mr. DeMallie informed the Board that a variance request for a buffer to the rear of this property has been submitted to the Town.
No one from the public spoke in favor or opposition to this appeal.
Answering questions from the Board, Mr. DeMallie explained that the existing building presently sits 1.6 feet from the front property line. After development is complete, the newly developed building will sit approximately 26 feet from the property line.
Commission members discussed this application at length. The Commission is not in opposition of the development of this area, but feels that a variance request should be more detailed for what the applicant is requesting. It was decided that this request would be withdrawn and an expanded variance request will be added to the application for a buffer to the rear of the property.
With no further questions, the public participation portion and public hearing of this appeal closed at 8:15 p.m.
Appl. #2684-06 – Al Kupchunos and Walter Kupchunos, 178 Graham Road, A-20 zone
Commissioner Jeski recused herself from this application.
Attorney Wayne Gerlt came before the Commission to represent Al & Walter Kupchunos. Attorney Gerlt explained that this request has resulted from an appeal. An agreement was reached in February. The request proposes three residential lots in place of the warehouse at 178 Graham Road. The applicant would like to request a 95’ variance on lot #3 because there will only be 5 feet of frontage. All three lots will share the same driveway. The hardship is that this application is the property is not large enough to use for an agricultural use. The plan presented is in total conformity to the Town’s comprehensive plan.
Mr. Leonard Glasser, 154 Graham Road came before the Commission to speak in favor of this appeal.
Chairperson Berstene read a letter speaking in favor of this appeal, (Attachment B), from Mr. & Mrs. Roy of 39 Locust Street.
No one from the public spoke in opposition to this appeal.
Answering questions from the Board, Attorney Gerlt stated that there are two acres of land which will be split into three residential lots.
With no further questions, the public participation portion and public hearing of this appeal closed at 8:15 p.m.
ITEM: Deliberative Session
Appl. #2684-06 – Al Kupchunos and Walter Kupchunos, c/o Wayne Gerlt, Esquire, 178 Graham Road, A-20 zone.
Motion to: approve with conditions appl. #2684-06 – Al Kupchunos and Walter Kupchunos, c/o Wayne Gerlt, Esquire, P.O. box 1132, South Windsor, CT., a 95’ variance to section 10.2 to allow lot #3 with 5’ of frontage, (100’ required), at 178 Graham Road, A-20 zone.
Was made by Commissioner Wagner
Seconded by Commissioner Dickey-Gaignat
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows: unanimous
The Board concluded the hardship to be as follows:
1. Application of the zoning regulations to this lot would preclude converting from agricultural use to a viable subdivision.
2. The change in use of this property would be in harmony with the neighborhood as far as size and use in the zone and would be an improvement to the neighborhood.
3. This plan conforms to residential usage as shown in the Town’s Plan of Conservation and Development.
The Board placed the following conditions on this application:
1. The existing warehouse structure must be removed within 365 days of subdivision approval by the Planning & Zoning Commission
2. The plan must be consistent with the subdivision plan dated May 19, 2006 presented at this meeting.
3. This approval is subject to all other conditions of the Settlement Agreement dated February, 2006.
Appl. #2683-06 – Jon D. Berman & Frank W. Russo, 819 Clark Street, RC zone
Motion to: approve appl. #2683-06 – Jon D. Berman & Frank W. Russo, a 46.5’ variance to section 10.2 for an existing structure 18.5’ from the front property line, at 819 Clark Street, RC zone.
Was made by Commissioner Gentile
Seconded by Commissioner Dickey-Gaignat
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows: unanimous
Hardship: Pre-existing structure of historic value was built 18.5’ from the property line. Previous variance granted in 1989 for the 19.7’ had a scribner’s error.
ITEM: Minutes
Motion to: approve the June 1, 2006 minutes.
Was made by Commissioner Jeski
Seconded by Commissioner Wagner
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows: unanimous
ITEM: Other Business
ZBA By-Laws
Ms. Michele Lipe, Assistant Director of Planning explained that she discussed this issue of “talking with the press”, but no policies have been found. The Planning & Zoning Commission will be having a workshop with the Town Attorney, at this workshop, Ms. Lipe stated she would ask the Attorney if there are any suggested policies for this item. More discussions on this item will be discussed at the September 7, 2006 meeting.
Commission members discussed the ability of having the packages delivered to their homes versus mailing them. It was suggested that an analysis be done to see which way is more cost effective because the Board needs to break even with their application fee. This item will be discussed further at the September 7, 2006 meeting.
ITEM: Adjournment
Motion to: adjourn the meeting at 9:14 p.m.
Was made by Commissioner Wagner
Seconded by Commissioner Dickey-Gaignat
The motion: carried
The vote was as follows: unanimous
Respectfully submitted,
________________________________
Deborah W. Reid
Recording Secretary
| 
