2026-09-15 - Planning & Zoning

00:00Roll.

00:00>> Sure. Alternate. Commissioner Scott

00:02>> here.

00:02>> Al Commissioner Pod.

00:04>> Al Commissioner K

00:05>> here.

00:06>> Commissioner McGuire.

00:08>> Commissioner Locks

00:09>> here.

00:09>> Commissioner Kohl's

00:10>> present.

00:11>> Commissioner Bougie

00:12>> here.

00:13>> Commissioner Goodrich

00:14>> here.

00:14>> Vice Chair Chaplinsky

00:16>> here.

00:16>> And Chair Wowski. Wowski is here. We

00:19have a quorum. Uh I'd like I've heard

00:21from Commissioner Magcguire. He will not

00:23be here. Uh in his place I will seat

00:26Commissioner K.

00:28Um, can we please rise for the pledge of

00:30>> allegiance?

00:34I pledge algiance to the flag of the

00:37United States of America and to the

00:39republic for which it stands, one nation

00:42under God, indivisible, with liberty and

00:45justice for all.

00:46>> Please remain standing for a moment of

00:48silent reflection uh especially for

00:51those who were lost on 911. [snorts]

01:00Thank you. You may be seated.

01:06Okay. At this point, I'd like to call

01:08Mike Seleleski

01:10to just rise. Um, we're going to appoint

01:13Mike as a as our alternate uh filling

01:16the alternate spot left by Commissioner

01:19Bougie. Mike, congratulations. Welcome

01:21to the team. Um, you just need to go see

01:25Kathy um and get sworn in. She

01:28unfortunately couldn't be here. Um, so

01:32or you could sit up here with us, but

01:33you can sit there or you can go home and

01:35watch us on TV, whatever, whatever you

01:37choose to do.

01:38>> So, thanks, Mike.

01:39>> Can you have a motion on that, Mr.

01:40Chairman?

01:41>> What's that?

01:41>> Could I have a motion on that, please?

01:42>> Oh, I'm sorry. Um, a motion to approve

01:47the appointment of Mike Sleski.

01:49>> Second.

01:50>> I have a second.

01:52All in favor?

01:54>> I I

01:56any opposed?

01:58>> Motion carries.

02:00>> Thanks, Mike.

02:01>> Congratulations. [applause and cheering]

02:04>> Okay. Item eight, approval of the

02:06[clears throat] minutes. Do I have a

02:07motion to approve the minutes for August

02:0918, 2026? I'll

02:11>> make a motion to approve the minutes

02:12from August 18th of 2026.

02:14>> So moved. All in favor?

02:17>> I.

02:17>> Any opposed?

02:18>> Second.

02:19>> Second.

02:20>> Second. Thank you. Gosh, I guess I'm

02:22really trying to get out of here. Sorry.

02:24[laughter] Sorry for that.

02:25>> Okay. Um, commissioner discussions, any

02:29any subcommittee reports?

02:32>> Um, I know that right now the only

02:35subcommittee that we really have that's

02:36operational is POCD and um, your work is

02:41done.

02:42>> So, there's not going to be much coming

02:43from that. So, um maybe we want to talk

02:48about

02:49if there is anything that we want to

02:52focus on and and perhaps form a

02:55subcommittee

02:56>> or two.

02:58>> I I will speak to the POCD item. I know

03:00Dave, we talked a little bit about it

03:01towards the end initiatives that we were

03:03going to have a follow-up committee for

03:04implementation of the various PC uh

03:06initiatives just to make sure that they

03:08don't just, you know, put them on the

03:09shelf and then fall by the wayside. So,

03:11>> okay,

03:11>> Dave, maybe we could reconnect on that

03:12and figure out like a game plan going

03:15forward.

03:15>> Yeah, we can get a schedule going.

03:16>> Yeah. No, I think that that's excellent.

03:18And I think in terms of if anybody's got

03:20a particular topic um that that they

03:24think we should focus on. And I know for

03:26myself um the affordable housing issue

03:29is is front and center and I'd like to

03:34see how we can you know collectively

03:37um maybe address some areas within town

03:40that that kind of that we'd encourage

03:43the the development in

03:45you know as opposed to you know

03:48combating it. So um I think that might

03:50be a good

03:51>> good thing

03:52>> proposing a a subcommittee for that.

03:55>> Yes. Oh, okay.

03:56>> Yes. Yeah. So, um I think moving

04:00forward. So, we should, you know, we

04:02could let let's talk about that after

04:04tonight's meeting and figure out how we

04:06can move forward on that. Um and so,

04:10moving to item 10, chairman's comments.

04:12I'd like to take this opportunity to uh

04:16introduce our our new town planner, uh

04:20Brandon Pete. If you'd like to say a few

04:22words, Brandon, everybody'd love to hear

04:23from you.

04:26Hi everyone. I believe some of you have

04:28seen my face by now, but uh my name is

04:30Brandon. I'm the new uh town planner. Um

04:34I graduated from Yukon with degrees in

04:37urban studies and GIS. I worked in a

04:40county government in Montana. Then I

04:43switched and had a brief stint at New

04:46Town, Connecticut. And previously I was

04:49working in Bristol, Connecticut as a

04:51zoning enforcement officer. Um, I will

04:54plan on staying after the meeting if

04:55anyone wants to touch base, have a quick

04:57conversation. Um, I would encourage all

05:00of you guys to give me an email or a

05:02call about things you're concerned about

05:04and I'd love to just know all of you

05:06guys personally because I plan on

05:08sticking around for a while. Uh, so

05:10again, I'm happy to be here. I'll

05:12probably um start taking over as early

05:15as the next meeting for the planning and

05:17zoning commission. Um, but this is my

05:20third week here. Uh, I've had a great

05:23opportunity to meet the town staff and

05:24learn the processes of how uh the town

05:27operates. So, thank you guys.

05:29>> Excellent. Thanks, Brandon.

05:30>> Welcome. Um, piggybacking off of that,

05:33I'd like to take this opportunity to to

05:36thank Dave Lavali for all of his hard

05:38work and diligence and and for me

05:41personally, the guidance that he's shown

05:42me through the transition um from my

05:47climb, so to speak, as as a commissioner

05:50to to Chair Dave's um guidance and

05:54information has been invaluable to me.

05:56So, and I hope that uh he reflects that

05:59to all. So, thank thank you so much,

06:01Dave. Sure. Happy to help.

06:02>> Um, all right. Moving forward, we we

06:04have no public hearings. Moving into the

06:06business meeting. Uh item A, 20 Spring

06:10Street Associates LLC site plan

06:12application for the renovation/con

06:14conversion of existing 5020

06:19square ft single tenant commercial

06:21building into two high turnover

06:23restaurant tenant spaces

06:2625 ft 2500 ft² and 2520 square feet with

06:31parking reconfiguration restriping

06:34drive-thru and 10 vehicle Q bypass lane

06:38and two dumpster pads. Property located

06:41at 20 Spring Street, zone B. And this is

06:44SP 1 N

06:48one nine. The floor is yours. Please

06:50introduce yourself.

06:51>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good

06:52evening to you and members of the

06:54commission. Um, for the record, my name

06:56is Timothy Herpst. I serve as general

06:59counsel for MB Financial Group LLC with

07:02offices at 15 Hosley Avenue in Brford,

07:04Connecticut. I represent them the

07:06company as well as its affiliates and

07:08subsidiaries including 20 Spring Street

07:11Associates LLC which is the applicant

07:13for this this application. Before I

07:16begin, congratulations to the new

07:18planner. I know there's a lot of

07:20activity going on here in Southernington

07:22and we hope to present an application to

07:24you tonight, a modification that uh

07:27meets your goals and objectives. So, we

07:30are here this evening on SPR1 1919

07:33seeking approval of a site plan

07:35modification for the property at 20

07:36Spring Street at the intersection of

07:38Spring Street and Queen Street. Before

07:42discussing the application, I want to

07:44acknowledge the planning and zoning

07:46department's review memorandum dated

07:48September 9th. We appreciate staff's

07:51review and comments. Our project

07:53engineer, Paul Rodriguez of Soleie

07:55Engineering, has submitted a written

07:58response data today addressing each of

08:00the issues raised by staff and several

08:02of those comments have resulted in

08:04modifications or additional commitments

08:07that we will discuss this evening.

08:10At the outset, I think it is important

08:12to put this application in its proper

08:15context. This is an existing developed

08:19commercial property in the town's

08:20business district. The property is

08:23presently improved within an

08:24approximately 5,020 ft commercial

08:27building together with parking and

08:29associated site improvements. The

08:32applicant is not proposing to expand the

08:34existing building footprint, nor are we

08:36proposing to develop previously

08:38undeveloped land. Instead, the applicant

08:41proposes to renovate and repurpose the

08:43existing building into two restaurant

08:45tenant spaces, approximately 2500 square

08:49ft for Cava and 2520 square ft for Panda

08:53Express.

08:55The submitted plans identify eating

08:57establishments without entertainment or

08:59the sale or service of alcoholic

09:01beverages as permitted in the business

09:03district subject to site plan approval.

09:07So fundamentally, this application

09:09represents the reinvestment and

09:10modernization of an existing commercial

09:12property, retaining the existing

09:15building footprint and existing Spring

09:17Street access while making targeted

09:20improvements to circulation, parking,

09:22and the overall functionality and

09:24appearance of the site. Let me highlight

09:27briefly and succinctly several aspects

09:30of the application.

09:32First, parking and circulation. The

09:35property presently contains 78 parking

09:37spaces. Based upon the proposed 83

09:40restaurant seats in the applicable

09:42parking calculation, 42 spaces are

09:46required. The plan originally proposed

09:4862 spaces, which substantially exceeds

09:51the requirement. Staff raised a concern

09:54regarding the relationship between the

09:56drive-through lane and certain parking

09:58spaces adjacent to the building. The

10:01applicant took that concern seriously.

10:04We convened with our engineering team

10:06and we have agreed to remove the four

10:08parking spaces located east of the

10:10drive-thru and north of the building,

10:12thereby creating additional room and

10:15reducing the potential conflict between

10:17vehicles backing from those spaces and

10:20vehicles utilizing the drive-thru.

10:22>> Excuse me. Can I interrupt you for one

10:24second? And I'm sorry. I know the floor

10:25is yours and you can present this any

10:27way you'd like. Um, but you're talking

10:30about

10:31ideas with with no drawing. So, I'm not

10:35sure that the commissioners have an

10:38ability to understand what you're

10:40talking about. You know, it's it's

10:42abstract. You know, I'm familiar with

10:44the property, but I I don't want to

10:46speak for the entire commission. But

10:49again, the floor is yours. I wanted to

10:50point that out and give you the

10:51opportunity. If you'd like to show us a

10:53plan that coincides with your speaking,

10:56then then the

10:57>> what I was planning on doing was just to

10:59give a summary and then have Mr.

11:00Rodriguez come up and present the

11:02technical components of the an over

11:05yours.

11:05>> Okay.

11:06>> Uh the drive-thru has been designed with

11:09a 10 vehicle uh queue and a bypass lane.

11:12We are also maintaining the property's

11:13existing Spring Street access rather

11:15than introducing a new curb cut.

11:20Third, we've responded to the other

11:21practical site concerns identified by

11:23staff. Uh because of the property's

11:26adjacency to the linear trail, the plans

11:28will be revised to provide a bicycle

11:29rack accommodating four bicycles. Staff

11:33also requested that the existing catch

11:35basins and sumps be inspected. Solely

11:37inspected all three existing catch

11:40basins today. All three were determined

11:42to be suitable for reuse. One basin on

11:44the north side along Spring Street was

11:46found to contain sediment and a note

11:49will be added to the plans requiring the

11:50basins to be vacuum cleaned. Uh fourth,

11:54uh this redevelopment results in a

11:55measurable improvement in pvious

11:57coverage. The project produces a net

12:00reduction of approximately 709 square ft

12:02of impervious area. And finally, I would

12:05ask uh the commission to consider this

12:08property in its actual setting. As I

12:10mentioned, this is an established

12:11commercial location. Uh, it's bounded by

12:14commercial development to the west,

12:16Spring Street to the north, Queen Street

12:18to the east, and Interstate 84 westbound

12:21ramp to the south.

12:23At this time, I would like to turn the

12:26presentation over to Paul Rodriguez of

12:30Soleie Engineering, who's going to walk

12:32you through this proposed site plan

12:34modification and present to you the

12:36plans that we have prepared tonight um

12:39that are consistent with my comments.

12:45>> Thanks, Tim. Um, for the record, Paul

12:48Rodriguez, Sully Engineering, um, 993

12:50Farmington Avenue, uh, West Hartford,

12:55I guess.

12:58So, here's an aerial view, excuse

13:00[clears throat] me, of the site noted

13:02here in the center just to kind of

13:03everybody get their bearings straight.

13:05Spring Street, as mentioned, to the

13:06north, Queen Street to the east, um, 84

13:10off-ramp and on-ramp to the south. Um,

13:12as you can see, this is the district

13:14mentioned earlier with an array of uh

13:16businesses around, most namely BJ's

13:19here, Chili's on the north side as well.

13:25Here is a more zoomed in view of our

13:28project site. Again, this is one

13:30building, currently one building that

13:33was servicing one tenant, which was the

13:35old plan B that has since been vacant.

13:37Um the proposal is to split the building

13:40into two creating two tenants um and

13:44redeveloping the existing vacant lot.

13:50Now we dive in excuse [clears throat] me

13:51into the plans. Um a lot of this has

13:53been mentioned but I'll point out where

13:55on the plan that this is located. Again

13:57we have the building in the center of

13:59the a little bit southwest of the center

14:02of the the lot. Um a lot of the striping

14:04parking um access will be stay the same

14:07on the east side. Um the proposal is to

14:10just do improvements where needed to

14:13retrofit the building to two tenant use.

14:15Um as mentioned here is the 10 Q car Q

14:19uh with bypass drive-thru which is

14:21allowed per the zone. A small addition

14:24to the building here for the

14:25drive-through window. Another small

14:27addition in the back for a walk up

14:29freezer. Um, so this right now currently

14:34this area in the back of the west and

14:36the south is currently paved and striped

14:38with parking. Um, so we are going to

14:41reuse that pavement area. Um, just kind

14:44of reconfiguring slightly to allow for

14:46the drive-thru. Um, as mentioned, there

14:48are 78 spots on on site. We were

14:51proposing 62 with 42 required. However,

14:55after reviewing the comments, we were we

14:58are agreeing to remove these four

15:00parking spots here, which could have a

15:02conflict with the um drive lane here.

15:05So, that'll drop us to 58 parking

15:07spaces, which is still above the 42

15:09required parking spaces. Um we also are

15:12proposing two dumpsters, uh one for each

15:14tenant on site, and the rest of the site

15:18pretty much will stay as is.

15:22Um what you're looking here is was

15:24submitted was the grading and utility

15:26plan. Um the grading uh the proposed

15:29drainage basically mimics the existing

15:31drainage. Um again doing um just the

15:35area that we are developing or

15:37redeveloping on the west and south side.

15:39There is a net a uh an existing high

15:41point here where uh runoff drains north

15:44to the existing structure located here

15:47as well as drains to the south and east

15:49to an existing structure here. Um so

15:51those patterns will remain as is from

15:54existing condition to proposed

15:55condition. Um the only difference is

15:58that we are reducing the impervious co

16:00cover as mentioned earlier to um by 709

16:03square feet and that is due to the bump

16:05out of this curb line on the west side

16:08adding some more grass between these two

16:10properties that don't exist today.

16:13Um as mentioned the three catch basins

16:15are listed here one two three on site

16:18and in our opinion they are suitable for

16:21reuse. Um, we will do a cleaning and

16:24back of one structure that's full of

16:26sediment, which is this one. The other

16:27ones were flowing as of this morning.

16:31There is a new fire service being

16:32brought into the building as the

16:34building currently doesn't have a fire

16:35service. Um, so that's a utility upgrade

16:38as well as providing two meters, one for

16:40each tenant.

16:45This here is our erosion sedimentation

16:46control. As mentioned earlier, we are

16:48disturbing the west and south sides.

16:50Therefore, we are going to install sill

16:52fence along the west and south sides and

16:54inlet protection on the structures on

16:56site as well as the one on spring

16:58street.

17:01Um the next set of uh slides that we

17:05have are kind of renderings from the

17:06architectural team that kind of shows

17:08demonstrates kind of the the elevations

17:11of facades of the new renovations. Um

17:14again the two tenants one on each side

17:16anchoring the building. This is the

17:18front. This is the I believe it was the

17:21north side.

17:23Then we have the south side and the west

17:25side which will remain mainly unchanged

17:28except for the addition of the bumpout

17:30freezer.

17:33And here is a rendering perspective of

17:36how the building/site would look from

17:39Queen Street.

17:44Um, at that time, I guess I'm turn it

17:47back over to Tim if you have or no,

17:49we'll uh turn it over back to the

17:51commission um for any comments,

17:54questions that you may have.

17:59>> All right. So, you're good with your

18:00your presentation at the moment?

18:02>> Yes.

18:03>> Okay. At this point, I'll open it up to

18:05members of the commission. Do I have any

18:08questions for the applicant?

18:11>> Yeah, just a couple. So I know um we

18:13have a few pending items here plus the

18:16looks like the engineering comments are

18:18still responses pending Dave. We we

18:20haven't heard back from that and we

18:22>> No, I just sent them earlier today.

18:23>> Yeah, we just received them today. A

18:25couple hours ago.

18:26>> Yeah. Okay.

18:27>> And then Okay. No, that makes sense.

18:28>> Just to that point, we do not object to

18:30any of those comments there. We will

18:32address that on the revised plan set.

18:34>> Okay. And then um since the two

18:37restaurants or businesses seem to be a

18:40little bit different in regards to how

18:41they're going to operate with one having

18:43a drive-thru and the other being

18:44presumably more sit down.

18:47Cabba I'm assuming be more sit down. The

18:49Panda Express is probably going to be

18:50more of a drive-through.

18:51>> Drive through.

18:51>> Um it's kind of a combination.

18:54>> Yeah, there will be seats in both

18:55buildings. Yeah.

18:56>> Got it. Okay. So I just

18:58>> also shows 83 seats between the two.

19:00>> Okay. Got it. I just wasn't sure in

19:02regards to the parking. Is there going

19:03to be any kind of like barrier so that

19:05each park each restaurant has roughly

19:07the same number of parking spaces or is

19:09it just a first come first- serve basis?

19:11>> Right now there's no uh segregation in

19:12the park and

19:14>> Okay, that's all I have.

19:17>> Anyone else?

19:18>> Cat,

19:19>> thank you. Um at this point,

19:24um when do you think a traffic study

19:26would be ready?

19:27>> So, a traffic study is in process as

19:29requested by the planning department. Um

19:31it should be done within the next two

19:34weeks, week and a half, two weeks.

19:36>> Thank you. One more question. Um in this

19:39particular situation, there is an

19:40existing structure. Do you plan on using

19:43as much material as possible in this

19:46build, meaning from the existing

19:47structure?

19:48>> Yes. Yes.

19:49>> Okay. Okay.

19:50>> Yeah. The facade will will be renovated,

19:52but the structure is the shell is

19:54intended to be reused. Yes.

19:56>> Thank you. That's all, Mr. Chair.

19:58>> Okay. All set. Commissioner Goodrich,

20:01>> you mentioned a walk up freezer. Did Did

20:04What's a walk up freezer?

20:06>> It's a place for um for the restaurant

20:09to store supplies, um produce. Um and

20:12it's only accessible from the inside.

20:14>> Oh, so like a walk-in freezer.

20:16>> Yes. Sorry. Yes, a walk-in.

20:17>> Gotcha. Um and then what about

20:20landscaping? I didn't see any

20:21landscaping on on on the plan. And I

20:25think it's really important because this

20:27is the first like this is like the the

20:30first thing people come to see when they

20:32enter Southernington, right? Like right

20:33off the the the exit ramp. Um

20:36>> do you have any plans or could you have

20:39some plans to improve the landscaping?

20:42>> Sure, we can. Yes, we can look into

20:43that. Right now the intent was to leave

20:45most of the landscaping if not all

20:47currently as is and just uh kind of

20:50clean it up. Would you be open to maybe

20:54like a maybe like a masonary sign that

20:57said like welcome to Southernington on

20:58the corner?

21:00>> I don't think that will be an issue.

21:01Obviously any type of landscape

21:03enhancements that we would make to the

21:05property, we wouldn't want to do it in

21:06such a way that it would um

21:10obuscate any type of signage on the

21:14building so people can see the

21:15restaurants. But we we understand and

21:17recognize that if the commission would

21:19like some enhancements, we'd want to

21:21strike that appropriate balance. But to

21:23answer your question, I don't think that

21:24would be an issue at all

21:26>> just because it's right like right at

21:27the corner. You know, it's just coming

21:29in and out of Southernington. It's the

21:30first thing people see. And um I I love

21:34the the plane. It looks really nice,

21:35especially compared to what's there

21:37today. And if we could enhance it a

21:39little bit better for Southernington, I

21:40I I would appreciate that. I I have to

21:43clear it with the boss, but I think the

21:45boss is probably going to agree.

21:47>> So, we a reasonable request.

21:49>> Yeah, if I may, we just have to be

21:51careful with an additional monument sign

21:53if they already have one. Um, just with

21:55regard to what's allowed, even if it's

21:57just like a welcome sign uh on the site.

22:00Uh, but additionally, I'd just like to

22:03offer that some landscaping be put on

22:05the north side of the dumpster

22:06enclosure. Uh, to his point, that it is

22:09quite visible. So,

22:11>> okay.

22:13>> Awesome, Mike.

22:14>> Yeah. Thanks, Caleb.

22:17>> All right. How's it going?

22:19>> Thanks for the presentation. I got a

22:20couple questions for you. Um,

22:22>> kind of following off what uh Cat had

22:25asked with regard to traffic study.

22:29Couple things that I'm going to be

22:30looking for when the traffic study comes

22:32out. So, previously this was a was one

22:36establishment sit down dining

22:39um and I don't understand how the

22:41calculations are created, but these are

22:44seem to be um high more high volume

22:48facilities that are going to go in here,

22:50including the drive-thru. So, I'm going

22:52to be looking to find out from you guys

22:55how many proposed um trips we're going

22:59to see for each of the facilities and

23:01how that's going to impact um

23:03specifically the queue on Spring Street

23:06to get on to Queen Street. Um because I

23:08I just my concern is that whatever

23:11queuing space um as as residents, we've

23:15seen that that can back up pretty far um

23:18just coming down Spring Street from the

23:20other businesses that are in that

23:21immediate vicinity. So, it's going to be

23:23a concern that we're going to want to

23:24make sure that we have addressed,

23:26especially if there's um like you said,

23:28there's there's more than ample parking

23:30spaces, but we just want to make sure

23:32that we're not jamming up any other

23:36problems with that Spring Street

23:37intersection.

23:38>> Understood.

23:39>> Understood. Yeah, we'll definitely take

23:40that into account with the traffic

23:42impact study. Um just to point out, I I

23:45totally agree and your concern about the

23:47queueing on Spring Street. um the

23:49driveway as existing and reuse for the

23:53proposed condition. It is located as far

23:55west as possible from the intersection

23:58as you know. Um also there is a do not

24:00block the in the box kind of sign and

24:03pavement markings which should alleviate

24:05some of the queuing concerns but we'll

24:07definitely take that into consideration

24:09as far as the trips.

24:10>> Thank you. I I appreciate it. It'll

24:11really help to kind of paint the picture

24:13for us.

24:13>> Yeah. And counts will be done this week.

24:15So um and then the report will follow

24:18shortly. Okay.

24:19>> Uh, next one is, so you did discuss that

24:23there's going to be two trash

24:24recepticles, one for each establishment.

24:28>> Um, is there going to be only, and I'm

24:32assuming that you're using this this the

24:34same infrastructure, but is there going

24:36to be one connection to the sewer line?

24:39um

24:39>> the building for both businesses,

24:41>> one sewer lateral, but we are reviewing

24:44internally with the uh the team that

24:46there will probably be two uh grease

24:48traps.

24:49>> That was my question. So, would those be

24:51subsurface [clears throat] grease traps

24:52or would they they would be?

24:53>> Yes. Yes. Similar to what's there now?

24:55There's currently one on site. Um so,

24:57there'll probably just be a second one

24:59added to it, but the same one lateral

25:01leaving the site to the street.

25:02>> Okay. So then when when you add that

25:05that um

25:08second one,

25:09>> it will appear on the site plan.

25:11>> Yes. On the utility plan. Yes.

25:12>> Okay. Good. And again, my my question

25:15just so that we're I'm I'm giving you

25:17what I'm going to be looking for next

25:18time

25:19>> is um where the where the access ports

25:22and cleanouts for those will be and how

25:25it's going to affect travel inside the

25:26area.

25:28>> Usually these things are done.

25:29>> Yeah. Off hours. Correct. Yeah. But

25:31yeah, it's it's

25:32>> agreed like deliveries are done off

25:33hours. Um sure the trash will be but the

25:36grease traps concerning as well will

25:38probably most likely be off hours but

25:40we'll confirm.

25:40>> Yeah. Um and then

25:44uh that is it. Thank you.

25:47>> Right.

25:48>> Right. Anyone else?

25:49>> Yes.

25:50>> Sue.

25:50>> Okay. Um with Chili's being across the

25:54street and I know it's the blocked area.

25:57>> Okay. Sometimes Chili's is backed up in

26:00their parking area. Okay.

26:02>> And so if we have a backup across the

26:05street, it's going to become a nightmare

26:07at that corner.

26:08>> So that's my concern. So if you could

26:11think about that carefully.

26:13>> Yeah.

26:13>> You know, and um also with the proposed

26:18um

26:20drive-thru that's for Panda Express,

26:22correct?

26:23>> Correct.

26:24>> Okay. If that's the case, a lot of

26:27times, let's say if the food's not

26:28ready, is there going to be excess

26:30parking spots so they could pull in,

26:33have the food delivered to them to keep

26:35the flow going?

26:37>> Uh, I'm not aware of food not being

26:39ready being a concern as it's my

26:41understanding that the food and panda is

26:43already pre pre-made and it's packaging.

26:45Yes.

26:46>> Okay. Okay. Thank you. Yeah,

26:51>> Dave.

26:53>> Um, you talked about eliminating four

26:55parking spots to the north of of the

26:57structure. Um, there's I'm looking at

26:58four to the south of the structure at

27:00the end of the drive-thru. Were there

27:01any concerns of, you know, backing up

27:03and sort of having to navigate the uh

27:04the drive-through line down there as

27:06well?

27:06>> Uh, no, we didn't see any concerns. Uh,

27:08the four on the bottom here, I think you

27:10were referring to. Yeah.

27:11>> Yeah. Um, as this is just a a bypass,

27:14there shouldn't be traffic as compared

27:16to the queue. Um, so we didn't feel too

27:18much of a concern on that move.

27:19>> Would those likely be uh employee park?

27:21>> Employee park. That's exactly what I was

27:23thinking. Yeah.

27:23>> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

27:25>> Okay. Thanks. Um, all right. So, now

27:28it's my turn. Um, I'm noticing in in

27:33some of the comments, the responses are

27:36this is an existing contision condition

27:38and the intent is to leave the site as

27:41is. Well, you know, we've had a chance

27:43to see this site

27:45>> develop over a period of years and we

27:48now recognize some of the problems that

27:51it created. So, um I don't feel that

27:54those answers are adequate at this

27:56point. Um you know, so I'm just going to

27:59start with where I see some issues. So,

28:02um I'd like to see a landscaping plan

28:05regardless if if there's, you know, show

28:07the existing stuff and then what you

28:09propose for new stuff. Um the lighting

28:13number six, uh all lighting should be

28:15full cut off and LED dark sky compliant.

28:18Uh the answer of

28:23this is an existing condition and the

28:25intent is to leave the site as is is not

28:27an answer. It needs to be compliant.

28:30um access easements

28:33that is number

28:36seven.

28:38This is an existing conditions and the

28:39intent is to leave the site as is. It

28:42needs to be in conformance.

28:44>> So, do you want an access to the

28:45neighbor I guess is the question?

28:48>> Yes. Yes.

28:51>> Oh, okay.

28:52>> All right. And I'm going to continue. We

28:54need we need to see the traffic study

28:56that intersection.

28:58um the previous owner andor town in

29:01conjunction reconfigured

29:04the way that traffic left that site. So

29:08be aware that there were a lot of

29:10restrictions on that owner at the time.

29:13And I'm not saying we're going to put

29:14them on you, but they look to enhance

29:17the traffic flow in and out. And if it's

29:20not adequate, you know, you're adding a

29:22drive-thru, that's a whole another

29:23animal. Um

29:25and so you know essentially you've we've

29:28had the opportunity to see the problems

29:30that that site has created and and

29:33you're proposing something different

29:34than what was there formally and I would

29:37have to state that what was there

29:39previously was a little more passive

29:42than what you're prop you know what

29:44you're proposing. So, um, please address

29:48the engine, you know, the the planners

29:50comments and we'll look forward to

29:52seeing you at the next meeting.

29:54>> Okay.

29:55>> Um, it well, I can't just cut it off

29:58like that. Is there anyone here from the

29:59public that wishes to speak for or

30:02against? Doesn't look like it.

30:04>> U, anyone here in favor?

30:08>> Okay. So, with everything said, does

30:10anyone have any other questions for

30:12these gentlemen? All right. So, we'll

30:14look forward to seeing your proposal um

30:17at our next meeting, Dave, which is when

30:19for their their benefit.

30:21>> Yeah. Two weeks.

30:22>> Two weeks.

30:24>> All right.

30:25>> Thank you.

30:26>> Thank you.

30:29>> What's that?

30:30>> We need a motion to table.

30:32>> Do we need a motion to table?

30:33>> Yep.

30:34>> All right. I'm looking for a motion to

30:35table.

30:36>> Make a motion to table. Uh was it item

30:39one SPR1 1919?

30:41>> We have a motion. Do we have a second?

30:43>> I'll second.

30:44>> Thank you, Cat. We have a second. All in

30:46favor?

30:47>> I.

30:48>> All right,

30:49moving forward. Uh, item B.

30:54>> All right, here we go. Dong key K, site

30:57plan application to replace an existing

30:59restaurant building with [clears throat]

31:01240 square ft of retail/off

31:05building and two studio apartment units

31:08on the second floor. property located at

31:10181 Main Street, zone CB. This is SP

31:15number 1 1920.

31:18Sev, the floor is yours. And just, if

31:21you don't mind, give us a little um

31:27cliffnotes version of why this

31:29application

31:31now flies with our zoning regulations.

31:34Um,

31:38>> trying to get the map up on the screen.

31:41>> Yeah, I [clears throat] don't want to

31:42confuse you.

32:06All right. Which one?

32:07>> I can't see that.

32:21>> Why would the bedding order? yesterday.

32:45>> Okay. Thank you.

32:51>> Good evening, Mr. Chairman, commission

32:52members, my name is Se Bino Planner with

32:54Cretzer Johnson and Associates

32:56representing the applicant on the screen

32:59here for orientation purposes. Um

33:02the property is located at the corner of

33:05Vermont Avenue and Main Street. Uh

33:09that's the site right there. The um

33:13property is uh the land area 6,434

33:18square ft. It is zone central business

33:21served by public water and sewer.

33:23Currently, it is um a vacant building

33:26that was built in 1930 uh with a

33:29basement approximately 251 square ft of

33:33space uh used over the years for bar and

33:37a restaurant. Um, this zone is a CB

33:41zone, does not require any minimum side

33:43or rear setbacks. It requires a 10-ft

33:46minimum front yard setback. The proposal

33:49is to remove the existing building and

33:52build a new one. Uh, will be slab on

33:54grade. This time it will not be any

33:56basement. It will be a woodframe

33:58structure. Uh, the first floor will be

34:01used for retail office space about 240

34:04square ft. uh with a second floor. The

34:07second floor will be used is planned to

34:09be used as a studio apartments, two of

34:12them. The allowed height in this zone is

34:1555 ft and we propose the height of the

34:18building to be 27 ft approximately. Uh

34:21the lock coverage allowed is 75%.

34:24Uh we propose 31.7%.

34:28Uh six parking spaces are proposed. Uh

34:31street trees are proposed per

34:33regulations.

34:35Um there's a concern that the town

34:37engineer has that maybe we need to move

34:39the trees a little bit to avoid any uh

34:42conflict with the driveway coming out

34:44looking toward the west. Um

34:47we'll be glad to do that. Uh we are

34:50maintain the same drainage patterns. The

34:52property slopes from uh the east to the

34:54west to this corner. Um we maintain the

34:58same pattern. uh we are providing uh

35:01storage volume for water quality and

35:03Zyra by intercepting the uh the roof

35:07drainage and uh directing underground

35:10storage and then overflow into the

35:11existing drainage system. Uh currently

35:15there are two curb cuts, one on Main

35:17Street and one on Vermont Avenue. We are

35:19proposing to close the curb cut that's

35:22on um Main Street.

35:26Uh we are also proposing access easement

35:29reciprocal access easement with the

35:31neighbor as required by the regulations.

35:34Uh we received staff comments. Uh the

35:38revised plans reflect the changes

35:40requested. Uh all the appropriate notes

35:42and details are on the plans. If you

35:45have any questions uh I believe with the

35:47uh application we submitted the

35:49architectural

35:50uh plans. Uh let's see we have it here.

36:05That's the retail space in the first

36:06floor.

36:08Second floor there's small area uh

36:10typically like a cape type style home

36:13for a studio apartment.

36:17the height of the building. You can see

36:19it's more looking like a house. Uh up

36:21the street there's the bread for life.

36:24Um on the left side on Vermont Avenue.

36:27This is going to look similar to that.

36:29Uh

36:33that's the looking toward uh Main

36:36Street.

36:42And this is what the rendering is of the

36:44building. If you have any questions at

36:45this time, I'd be glad to answer.

36:49>> At this time, I'll open it up to members

36:51of the commission. Does anyone have any

36:54questions for Mr. Bevino?

36:57>> Dennis, I'll go first. So, the second

37:00floor are going to be apartments,

37:02correct?

37:03>> Yes, sir.

37:04>> What's going to be the fire rating

37:06between the first floor and the second

37:08floor?

37:09>> It would have to meet the building code.

37:11If they require a two-hour rating,

37:13that's what we're going to have to

37:14provide.

37:15>> Did you mention it'd be wood framing,

37:17which is obviously

37:18>> Yes. Yes. But it's possible. It's

37:21doable.

37:23>> And the means of egress for the people

37:24on the second floor would be I don't see

37:28any staircases.

37:29>> This is a schematic right now. The the

37:32full building plans will have to be done

37:34and approved by the building department.

37:37Uh but because the size of the space is

37:40not a lot of space, this is 2,000 square

37:42feet. Um I don't believe it would be

37:46necessary a second eress from the

37:48upstairs.

37:52>> It's under my belief, if I remember the

37:54building code, uh it's 50 ft from an

37:58egress. So if each apartment is longer

38:01than 50 ft from the bedroom, you would

38:03need a second point of egress. Yeah, as

38:05I said, we'll have to meet the building

38:06code.

38:09>> Thank you.

38:10>> Thank you.

38:13>> Question,

38:14>> Caleb.

38:16>> Um, so it the whole

38:22I'm looking at 2,000 square feet. Is

38:24that is that first floor and second

38:26floor combined?

38:27>> What's that?

38:28>> Uh, I'm sorry. In the in the application

38:30here, it says uh building with 240

38:34square ft. So that's

38:35>> that's the basic uh floor area on the

38:38first floor. The the upstairs will be

38:39additional space.

38:41>> Okay. And about how much square footage

38:43will be in each because it's a studio

38:45apartment. So it'll just be

38:46>> it's about 500 square feet each.

38:48>> Okay. And that's going to be is that a a

38:51studio that would be all one open space.

38:54So bedroom, kitchenette.

38:57>> It's a studio apartment. Yeah. There

38:58will not be a wall separation. Yes.

39:01>> Okay.

39:03Um and then my I guess my last question

39:06is the kind of with parking and because

39:10we're going to have two we're proposing

39:13two spaces on the first floor. Um

39:16parking would be sufficient for both uh

39:19two occupancies and then an unknown

39:21businesses on the first floor. I guess

39:23my question is without knowing what kind

39:26of businesses are going to be in there

39:29um

39:30how would we evaluate

39:32>> it's three per thousand. So the required

39:35parking uh spaces there are three spaces

39:37per thousand square feet. So that's what

39:39we have six spaces.

39:41>> Okay. So that's regardless of what the

39:42use is.

39:43>> Yes.

39:44>> Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

39:47>> Dave I I will have one question. I'd

39:49like to just refer to Dave here on the

39:51parking issue, please.

39:52>> Oh, sure. Yeah. So, this is coming in

39:54under the new act where um since there's

39:58no uh essential regulation that applies

40:02to the parking under the act for

40:04residential portion, he's just parking

40:05for the commercial, but there is uh an

40:08allowance for that uh residential

40:10portion. Um it's overparked in the plaza

40:13across the street, so that's all shared.

40:15And then the applicant did round up from

40:186.12

40:19um to seven which you know it's

40:22typically 6.5 and up but they they round

40:24it up for one space.

40:27>> So

40:27>> for the requirement

40:29>> so there overflow parking across the

40:31street is there have to be some sort of

40:32lease agreement for that or

40:33>> only if it was well we'd like to see

40:35that but if it was municipal they'd have

40:37to go to the parking authority but we

40:38don't own across the street. Um it's

40:41just your comfort level with the fact

40:43that people use it and it's overparked

40:46and there's no um restricted signage in

40:48there that I've seen. But at this point,

40:51the parking that's allowed or the

40:53parking that's here would satisfy any

40:56requirements that we would have

40:58>> if if and again it's the one caveat that

41:01they rounded up one space of requirement

41:04even though it was 0.12 as opposed to

41:086.5 or higher. So they would they didn't

41:11have to round up but they did

41:13essentially and and it's in the interest

41:15of the tenants that hey you may be

41:18restricted. So,

41:19>> right. Perfect.

41:20>> Yeah.

41:21>> And that includes a handicap spot.

41:23>> Yeah. The six is included total.

41:26>> And there's no requirements for um EV

41:30charging at something like

41:31>> No, it's 30 and over for that. Yeah.

41:34>> Stop me before I get

41:36>> But I did I did have a question about

41:37the the setbacks. My original um

41:40comments got cut off. So, um I did have

41:44a concern about the original footprint

41:46wasn't conforming to the front setback.

41:48So it would have to meet that same

41:50footprint otherwise you need a variance.

41:52So um it's non-conforming and you can't

41:54increase the non-conformity by building

41:56it new. Uh there was never an intent to

41:58abandon uh the the footprint that's

42:00there. So you can certainly build upon

42:02that footprint. Um whether it's a

42:04basement or a slab, but you can can't

42:06really go more forward into any of the

42:08setbacks. Um so they may have to cut a

42:10little bit off the building or try and

42:12seek a variance for it.

42:17Are you aware of that, Sev?

42:19>> The setback that's proposed is u

42:23>> I believe it's more conforming but still

42:25within the setback.

42:27>> It's a it's not 10 ft which is the if

42:29you build brand new uh but it's uh

42:32>> okay

42:32>> it's the current setback right now the

42:36current building is 5.3

42:38and uh we are proposing

42:42the new building is

42:4570 change

42:48>> seven feet to the to the front of those.

42:51>> It would still it would still need the

42:53bearings because it's still not

42:54compliant

42:55because you're still increasing the the

42:57or you're still non-conforming even

42:59though you're decreasing the

43:00non-conformity. You only enjoy the

43:03existing footprint that's there.

43:05>> So you would be willing to go for a

43:07variance.

43:07>> Do we have to go for a variance?

43:09>> I believe so. just based on what we're

43:11seeing because the non-conforming nature

43:14of it um within the setback is

43:18recognized as long as there's no intent

43:19to abandon. So since there's no intent

43:21to abandon you, you can't go further

43:25into a setback even though it's within

43:28the you know you're decreasing the

43:31non-conformity, it's still not

43:33conforming by rebuilding it.

43:35>> We we can discuss that if you want, but

43:37it's it's an issue that needs to be

43:38resolved.

43:39>> No, no. Well, I'm trying to determine we

43:41continue this process here or does he

43:43need to get the variance first?

43:45>> Well, it depends which which route we

43:46go. We you can either shrink the

43:48building or go for the variance. So,

43:49we'll we'll talk about that because you

43:51need a hardship for the variance which

43:53>> so we we're building less square footage

43:552040 versus 2051. We occupying uh close

44:00to the existing footprint which is

44:02allowed. Now, why why do we need a

44:04variance?

44:06because you're you're essentially

44:07rebuilding within the the setback even

44:11though you know if you had the exact

44:13same I I think you balanced out right

44:15one side was either closer and then the

44:19front was closer or you you pulled one

44:21back but not the other. So we'll we'll

44:23look at this just recently came up in

44:25the review. So, I'll I'll be happy to

44:27work with them on that, but it's it's

44:29something that we

44:30>> we'll do whatever needs to be done. But,

44:31>> yeah. All right.

44:32>> The situation is is

44:34>> Yeah. Let's let's let the uh the rest of

44:37the commission ask their questions and

44:40it doesn't sound like we're going to

44:41vote on this till this issue is

44:42resolved. So, um let's finish the

44:45presentation. We'll get all the

44:46questions out of the way. Okay.

44:47>> And then we'll move forward from there.

44:49Okay. Is that is that agreeable?

44:51>> Sure.

44:51>> Okay. Anyone else have

44:54>> Todd?

44:55>> Yeah. Just a quick one. I know we talked

44:56a lot about the parking and whatnot, but

44:58um the spaces for the two uh spots

45:03upstairs, the residential units, they're

45:05going to be indicated there so that

45:06people aren't parking in those areas.

45:11>> Are they going to have dedicated spaces

45:12for the residential units upstairs? The

45:14people living?

45:14>> No, they could park anywhere.

45:17>> Okay. So you so there's enough parking

45:20so that if people were at the businesses

45:22or would they only be open during the

45:24day where people might, you know,

45:25typically be parked overnight? I'm just

45:27concerned that they might people that

45:28are living there would have to park

45:29across the street, walk all the way

45:30across just to get to their actual units

45:33where they live, you know,

45:34>> which is allowed. This is a downtown

45:37area. That's true. It's a, you know, you

45:39could go to the municipal parking

45:42>> or any private um property. As a matter

45:45of fact, this applicant owns the dollar

45:47store across the street in the parking

45:49area that's there.

45:51>> Y

45:51>> uh so they can see a mutually beneficial

45:54relationship there.

45:54>> Okay. All right. No, thanks.

45:57>> So just Seb, just to rehash real quick.

45:59Um

46:01this because it's business district,

46:04this this was allowed prior to any

46:06changes that were made to the state regs

46:07that we're now adopting.

46:09>> It was always allowed in a CB zone to

46:11have residential upstairs. Um, you know,

46:14with that stated, I think, um, you know,

46:17let's get the

46:19the setback issues resolved within with

46:22staff and then, um, we'll we'll deal

46:25with it, you know, in a couple weeks.

46:27And

46:28>> I'll meet with Dave and and we could

46:29decide to cut it back if we have to.

46:31>> Yeah. Whatever whatever makes the most

46:33sense for you. So, um,

46:35>> by the way, by the way, so you know, you

46:37if you're familiar with the property,

46:38there's a slate patio in the front which

46:41reaches the actual property line, the

46:43street line, uh, with the with the town.

46:45We are removing that. So, when you the

46:48end result of this, you actually have

46:49more space, but the setback to the main

46:52building is what it is. So, I'll have to

46:54>> Right. No, I I understand. So, um, are

46:57are you comfortable with everything if

46:59if we look for a motion to table?

47:01>> That's fine.

47:02>> All right. Thank you. Uh with that, I'll

47:04be looking for a motion to table uh this

47:07application, which is SPR number 1920.

47:11>> Make a motion to table SPR 1920.

47:14>> I have a a motion from Commissioner

47:16Kohl's. Do I have a second?

47:17>> Second.

47:18>> Second from Commissioner Japlinsky. Uh

47:21all in favor?

47:23>> I. Motion carries. Thank you.

47:25>> Thank you.

47:26>> Um

47:29see here.

47:32All right. All right. With that said,

47:33administrative items.

47:35>> I don't have any, Mr. Chairman.

47:37>> Okay. Uh receipt of new applications and

47:40items to schedule for public hearing.

47:42>> Yes. So, this is uh a pair of

47:45applications that came as a result of

47:47the uh zone change to ArchZ for 310

47:51Buckland. Uh you'll be seeing a site

47:54plan and a special permit as is always

47:56associated with these developments. Um

47:59the plans are ready for presentation at

48:01the next meeting and uh checklists have

48:04already been uh started on it.

48:09All right. Very good. Um I think we've

48:12all familiar with that. We saw we made

48:15the zone change. Um it made sense for

48:17the town. Um made sense for everyone. Um

48:23so with that said, um I'm looking for a

48:26motion to adjurnn. Make a motion to

48:28adjurnn. Second

48:29>> and a second. All in favor?

48:32>> Motion carries. Thank you for your help

48:33tonight, everyone.