February 14, 2023
Public Hearings
Application seeking a Special Permit under Zoning Regulations Section 3.5.2.17 for a caretaker apartment for property located at 352 Salmon Brook Street, C2 Zone, File Z-23-22.
Applicant and property owner Shaun Levesque was present to discuss the application. He is applying to construct a 475 square foot, 1-bedroom and 1-bathroom caretaker apartment above an existing business at 352 Salmon Brook Street. The apartment would be occupied by an employee. The space was constructed as an office when the original structure was built, and already has electrical and plumbing roughed-in. The site is served by public water and a septic system. The applicant has received approval from the Farmington Valley Health District. Director of Community Development Abbey Kenyon provided background on the property, which received Special Permit approval for a landscaping business and automotive repair shop a few years ago. The proposed parking for the caretaker apartment would be behind the existing fence, and she reiterated for the record that the apartment is for an individual who works on the property and cannot be leased out to the general public. There was no public comment and the public hearing closed at 7:10 p.m.
Action:
ON A MOTION by E. Myers seconded by J. Boardman, the commission voted (7-0-0) to approve the caretaker apartment for property located at 352 Salmon Brook Street. The caretaker apartment can only be occupied by an employee; it can’t be leased to non-employees. The resident cannot continue to occupy the apartment if employment is terminated.
Application seeking a Special Permit under Zoning Regulations Section 8.1.3.4 for a garage in excess of 1,000 square feet located at 96R Mountain Road, R2A Zone, File Z-1-23.
Applicant and property owner Filipe Pereira was present to discuss the application. He is applying to construct a 64’ x 34’ x 21’ detached garage, inclusive of all overhangs for personal use. Due to the location of the existing septic system and presence of wetland soils, along with the topography, the applicant received approvals from the Zoning Board of Appeals and Inland Wetlands and Watercourses commission. The property is wooded and is a rear lot, and the proposed structure would not be visible from the adjacent properties. The proposed structure would be a tan and brown steel building to blend in with the environment. There would be no exterior lighting. There was no public comment and the public hearing closed at 7:16 p.m.
Action:
ON A MOTION by E. Myers seconded by C. Chinni, the commission voted (7-0-0) to approve a garage in excess of 1,000 square feet located at 96R Mountain Road, R2A Zone, File Z-1-23.
Application seeking an amendment to Zoning Regulations Section 3.11, which would allow rear lots in the R4A Zone by Special Permit, File Z-2-23.
Applicant Matt Reale of 96 Daniel Trace, Burlington, was present to discuss the application. Rear lots are not currently allowed in the R4A Zone, either by right or by special permit and the applicant proposes to amend the zoning regulations to allow rear lots by special permit in the R4A Zone. He is looking to create a rear lot on an existing parcel in order to preserve the lot frontage for agricultural purposes, which is currently being used for farming. By allowing rear lots in this area, the property owner would be able to continue farming the front fields while selling the remaining property for potential new homes. Kenyon provided an in-depth overview of the 2006 Case Street Study, which led to the creation of the R4A Rural Conservation Zone. M. Lockwood reiterated for the record and the public that this is a proposed text amendment, so the commission must consider potential impacts on the entire zone. Reference was made to the Plan of Conservation and Development and questions were raised as to how this proposed change would affect the town, as well as property owners within the zone.
Public Comment
Stanley Kardis, 201 Case Street, is part owner of 186 Case Street and is looking to carve out and preserve the front portion of the property for agricultural purposes. The remaining property would be sold and developed. He stated how he’s been working on preserving the fields since 2016 and trying to reach an agreement with relatives on the future of the property.
Chris Kardis, 201 Case Street, spoke in favor of rear lots within the R4A Zone, as it would allow for the construction of homes farther back from the road and preserve the existing streetscape.
Filipe Pereira, 96R Mountain Road, requested clarification on the process for text amendments.
Anna Sogliuzzo, 15 Old Orchard Road, spoke in favor of the application as it would allow development out of sight in order to preserve fields and the existing streetscape.
Deborah Kardis, 201 Case Street, spoke in favor of the application, stating property owners within the R4A Zone should have the same development potential as those in other residential zones.
Action:
E. Lukingbeal asked staff to analyze how many lots would be impacted by the proposed regulation amendment and C. Chinni questioned how this change would preserve farmland. M. Lockwood recommended continuing the public hearing to the next regular meeting on February 28, which the commission agreed to.
Commission Discussion: Neighborhood and Commercial Transition Zone (T1) proposed regulation changes
Kenyon provided the commission with a redlined document that showed the most recent changes requested by the commission based on prior discussion, as well as maps to show proposed setback changes, etc. She read through the modifications and the commission discussed the proposed language at length, focusing heavily on landscape buffer requirements and parking setbacks. With a concern regarding the streetscape buffer and softening the view from the street, it was requested that staff prepare additional maps to demonstrate alternative setbacks. The commission discussed a timeline for seeking public input. It was decided to solicit public input during either the March 14 or the March 28 regular meeting.
Commission Discussion:
Granby Center Study Scope
Kenyon provided a memorandum for consideration from the Development commission that outlined a potential list of items to include in the study of Granby Center, as well as a process for moving forward. M. Lockwood stated that he would like to receive public input as soon as possible. Discussion was postponed until the next regular meeting on Feb. 28 so that public input could be received.
Staff Report and Correspondence
Kenyon informed the commission that she has begun researching cannabis regulations and reached out to other municipalities for examples of adopted regulations.
February 28, 2023
Public Hearings
Application seeking a Special Permit under Zoning Regulations Sections 8.6.13 and 8.6.14 for an illuminated building sign that exceeds the allowable size for property located at 565 Salmon Brook Street, C2 Zone: File Z-3-23.
Applicant Paul Bianca of Bianca Signs was present via Zoom to discuss the application. The owners of Sotelo’s Pizza and Restaurant are looking to install a new sign within the existing sign cabinet on the roof, which measures 90 square feet. The proposed sign would consist of 48 square feet within the middle of the sign cabinet and be illuminated via internal LED lighting. The commission discussed the possibility of utilizing back lit letters instead of having the entire sign cabinet illuminated, and having the sign turned off when the business is closed. E. Lukingbeal also noted the proposed language on the sign had a spelling error.
Benjamin Perron, 25 Archie Lane, had concerns with the proposed size of the sign versus what the regulations allow without a Special Permit. He also noted concerns with illuminated signs. The public hearing closed at 7:59 p.m.
Action:
ON A MOTION by E. Lukingbeal seconded by J. Boardman, the commission voted (7-0-0) to approve an application seeking a Special Permit under Zoning Regulations Sections 8.6.13 and 8.6.14 for an illuminated building sign that exceeds the allowable size for property located at 565 Salmon Brook Street, C2 Zone, File Z-3-23, subject to the following conditions:
The sign background shall be opaque and only the letters may be illuminated; and,
The sign must be turned off when the business is closed.
Application seeking a Special Permit under Zoning Regulations Section 8.6.13 for a wall sign that exceeds the allowable size for property located at 12 Mechanicsville Road, C2 Zone: File Z-4-23.
Applicants/owners David Hrdlicka and Brent Davenport of Shaffer Beacon Mechanical, LLC were present to discuss the application. They are looking to install a new 42-square-foot wall sign on the side of the building that faces the parking lot, which currently has a temporary banner in place. No sign illumination is proposed; however, there is an existing exterior light located above the proposed sign that casts light onto the parking lot and entry.
Action:
ON A MOTION by C. Chinni seconded by B. Sheahan, the commission voted (7-0-0) to approve an application seeking a Special Permit under Zoning Regulations Section 8.6.13 for a wall sign that exceeds the allowable size for property located at 12 Mechanicsville Road, C2 Zone, File Z-4-23, as proposed.
Michael Gron, 395 Salmon Brook Street, stated that he would like to see adjustments made to the existing light and has no issues with the proposed sign. The public hearing closed at 8:07 p.m.
Application seeking an amendment to Zoning Regulations Section 3.11, which would allow rear lots in the R4A Zone by Special Permit: File Z-2-23.
Kenyon summarized the discussion at the prior meeting and provided a list of properties within the R4A zone that would be impacted by this regulation amendment. In total, there are 104 properties within the zone and at least 17 or 16 percent could have at least one rear lot. Kenyon reiterated that this list does not take into consideration environmental constraints, which is evaluated on a site-by-site basis.
Stanley Kardys, 201 Case Street, re-stated for the record that he is part owner of 186 Case Street and is looking to carve out and preserve the front portion of the property for agricultural purposes. He referenced meeting minutes from the 2006 Case Street Study Committee and stated how preventing rear lots will destroy farmland and lead to even more development.
Phillip LaPointe, 210 Case Street, spoke against the application.
Anna Sogliuzzo, 15 Old Orchard Road, would like to see the Case Street streetscape preserved with homes pushed back and stated how this restriction is not in any other residential zone.
Heather Lombardo, 19 Broad Hill Road, spoke in favor of the application and asked the commission to consider farming implications and the preservation of agricultural land.
Applicant Matt Reale, 96 Daniel Trace, Burlington, stated that rear lots would allow for less development in regard to 186 Case Street, as current regulations would allow more development along the frontage and impact the existing streetscape.
The commission discussed the application at length and stated how approving rear lots would not guarantee the preservation of agricultural land along the road frontage. P. Johnson questioned whether a consideration for agricultural preservation could be included under Section 8.14 of the regulations. E. Lukingbeal and C. Chinni stated that they are not comfortable with changing the regulations based on one application. Kenyon stated for the record that she had received correspondence via email from Pat Orlowski and Edward Dombkowski, which was distributed to the commission prior to the meeting. The public hearing closed at 8:37 p.m.
NO ACTION:
There was no deliberation and discussion was continued to the next regular meeting on March 14, 2023.
Commission Discussion: Neighborhood and Commercial Transition Zone (T1) proposed regulation changes
In response to the commission’s concern regarding setbacks and the streetscape buffer, Kenyon prepared and distributed multiple maps to demonstrate alternative setbacks. The commission discussed at length the various setbacks and if one setback should be implemented, which would allow developers to choose whether or not parking should be in the front or the rear of the building. There was a general consensus that many lots would be rendered undevelopable with a 75 and 100-foot setback requirement. In order to provide an adequate landscape buffer, the commission suggested a 30-foot parking setback and 60-foot building setback. Discussion was continued to the next regular meeting, where staff will present maps depicting the proposed setbacks and conversation will include drive-thru establishments.
Staff Report and Correspondence
Kenyon informed the commission that she met with the Department of Transportation regarding the road re-construction project in Granby center. Construction will ramp-up come the beginning of April and consist of night work and detours, which will be advertised to the public in the Granby Drummer and on the Town Website.