Click here to view DECEMBER 12, 2001 minutes
Click here to view JANUARY 16, 2002 minutes
Click here to view FEBRUARY 20, 2002 minutes
Click here to view FEBRUARY 28, 2002 minutes
Click here to view MARCH 20, 2002 minutes
Click here to view APRIL 17, 2002 minutes

MAY 15, 2002

CALL TO ORDER

The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7.35pm.

___________________________________________________________________________

ROLL CALL

STAFF: Michael Greene, Director of Planning and Zoning; Dori Wilson

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Ms. Light read through all the notices. The Chairman went over the ground rules of a public hearing.

1. #3-02SP/#14-02CAM – Brian’s Auto Works – 22,24 Woodward Avenue – Convert warehouse to used truck repair and sales.

Attorney Strassberger, on behalf of the client, handed the green certified mail cards to Mr. Greene and introduced Mr. Straight a landscape architect. Mr. Straight stated that this is an existing building currently used as a warehouse and the application is to convert it to Brian’s Auto Works. He had three main items to address, the first was the landscaping, three pear trees were to be added. Secondly, they had utilized the paved area for parking (five spaces) and lastly, they had added a new trash enclosure and oil separator, all as part of the application. All the city utilities are in place, it is a fenced in area. He stated that this is a CAM application as it is within a 1000ft of the harbor; although it is not water-dependent.

Diane Lauricella spoke on behalf of members in her neighborhoods that were unable to make it to the meeting. She had reviewed the application and was pleased to see the use of an oil separator and the landscaping. However she did not object to this application specifically, she wanted to use it as an example of the growing number of businesses like this on this particular street and how it was bringing the price of property down. She requested that if this application be approved then they maintain zoning compliance. She also said that there were a number of violations in this area and gave examples.

Mr. DesRochers stated that if there were zoning violations, as Ms. Lauricella had suggested, then she should inform Mr. Greene. He appreciated her comments. Mr. Santo asked Mr. Greene if there were any zoning violations on this property, to this Mr. Greene replied no.

Attorney Strassberger said there was no zoning violation on this property and he considered their application to be an asset to Woodward Avenue.

Mr. DesRochers closed the hearing.

2. #1-02SP #10-02 CAM – Norwalk Historical Commission – 2 East Wall St/Mill Hill Complex – Reconstruct historic Rogers-Ritch Merritt house on historic complex (Open hearing and continue to June 19, 2002 to await ZBA decision).

** MR. DESROCHERS MOVED TO CONTINUE TO JUNE 19, 2002.

** MR. SANTO SECONDED.

** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

3. #5-02SP – Darien Fabricare Center, Inc – 5 Holmes Street – Reuse of building for commercial dry cleaners.

Attorney Greiner, on behalf of the applicant, stated this is an application for a special permit for a proposed dry cleaners in a 2 zone. The current use is for self-storage and warehouse. The proposed use is for dry cleaning, storage and dispatch. The applicants currently have an operation in Darien, where the clothes would be picked up and taken to the proposed site on Holmes Street – he stated that it would not be a retail site but an off-site warehouse processing facility. Attorney Greiner wished to address the 120ft driveway, which they had reduced to a 40ft driveway in accordance with DPW; two 8ft wide islands, a 3ft hedge and 3 shady trees. The curb plan will match that of the existing roadway. State of the art equipment will be used. It is a closed end unit so that no product can get into the sanitary system – it is collected and then recycled. The hours of operation are Monday through Friday 7-8 and Saturday 8-12. They anticipate employing between 11 and 18 employees, 3 of which will be licensed to drive the vans back and forth from Darien. The other employees currently utilize public transport and carpool.

Mr. DesRochers asked how often the environmental firm comes to dispose of the used products. Attorney Greiner referred the question to the owner, Mr. Aspareno, who said once every two weeks (approximately). Mr. DesRochers asked how the equipment was situated. Mr. Aspareno said it was freestanding and was on a platform. Mr. DesRochers asked what the back up plan was if there was a leakage. Attorney Greiner stated that a system could be installed whereby if this did happen then an alarm would sound, and the system would shut off.

Mr. DesRochers asked the public for any comments or questions.

Nancy Whitmore from 28 West Main Street, stated that the building on 5 Holmes Street is in her backyard. She had concerns regarding the traffic and about the fumes that may come from the building that could effect children playing in the park. Attorney Greiner said her property is in the NorthWest corner of the property and any traffic that goes to the building should not be a problem, there is no access to the building on that side and the workers would use the entrance on Main Street. Attorney Griener stated that no fumes would come from the building, their system is close looped and there will be no venting to the outside.

William Bush from 26 West Main Street stated that his building is directly in the back of the building on 5 Holmes Street. He said that the distance between 5 Holmes Street and 26 West Main Street is only 4ft; he said this is too close and it was questionable as to just how many chemicals can be contained. He said there will be a parking problem, there is no room for parking. Another concern was that the 11-18 employees would want to use his backyard as a place to take their breaks; he wanted to state that this would be trespassing. He stated that with all the activity in the area this would make the price of houses go down considerably.

Mr. Santo told Mr. Bush that West Main Street is the jewel of Norwalk and there was no intention of encouraging businesses there that would make the price of property plummet. Mr. Santo then asked Mr. Bush if he thought a fence around his property might help. Mr. Bush replied no to a fence as it would look like a prison.

Ms. Lauricella said she had lived on Main Street for a number for a number of years and appreciated the concern of the neighbors. She spoke to the Commissioners and gave them some advice on how they could consider the application and then to enforce some guidelines. For example, because the building is old, to make sure that the floors are sealed and free from cracks so if for any reason, the chemicals were spilled then they could not get into the septic system. Also to have an air quality filter installed to make sure no odorous fumes escape into the air.

Ms. Abraham said she was concerned for the safety of the children in the area because of the increase in traffic.

Attorney Greiner stated that they were very willing to work with the neighbors. They would be happy to add more plants or greenery. Attorney Greiner showed Mr. Bush a map of the building and showed him an area that had been designated for a break area. He continued to say that the owner had been in business for ten years and had never had a problem in the past. He stated again, it was a closed loop system. Attorney Greiner addresses the traffic issue, he said that the vans would only be going to this site two, or at the most three times a day. They would use vans (similar to mini-vans), not heavy trucks and they would utilize Main Street.

Mr. Greene informed Attorney Greiner that they were responsible for the drainage/floor drains and he made a suggestion that they have a professional engineer inspect them to ensure that they are in compliance with current building codes.

Mr. DesRochers closed the public hearing.

4. #6-02SP – Roman’s Automotive Service – 29 North Avenue – Automotive repair and sales.

Attorney LiVolsi stated the applicant proposed to reuse the existing one story building as an auto repair/service facility. Also proposed for the site are automotive sales in the existing parking lot. In support of the application they had also filed a site report, a traffic report, a photometry layout and some photos of the existing building. She asked Mr. Wardell from the Butler Design Group, to take the Commissioners through the site plan.

Mr. Wardell showed the Commissioners a map of the site. He stated that the business was in keeping with other businesses in the area. He said that the proposed improvements to this site would be to add new sidewalks, to add a planting buffer and to add a waste receptacle, which would contain hazardous waste, oil etc. He illustrated where the signs would be placed on the building and that they are in accordance with zoning regulations.

Mr. Mass spoke about the findings in the traffic report. He recommended that a one way system be created so cars would not be exiting on the western side of the parking lot.

Mr. Greene stated that there were no violations at this site.

Mr. DesRochers closed the hearing.

Mr. Minoff, the owner of Perfect Plantings, gave his green certified mail cards to Mr. Greene. Mr. Minoff stated that since their last meeting they have submitted a landscape plan. He gave a brief description of the area, what building they would use and the hours of work. Other than that he had nothing new to add to his application.

Mr. DesRochers closed the hearing.

Attorney LiVolsi tendered the green certified mail cards to Mr. Greene and to ask to continue the matter to June 19, 2002.

7. #4-02R – Norden Place, LLC – Proposed amendment to Section 118-711 to allow offices to occupy up to 35% of existing buildings in Restricted Industrial zones.

Ms. Light read letters received from Richard Stoecker from SWPA, Katherine Barnard from Westport Planning and Zoning, Chief William Chiarenzelli from Westport Police and Dorothy Wilson from Norwalk Planning Commission.

Attorney Flaherty represented his client in the matter of Norden Place LLC. He showed the Commissioners a map and gave a brief presentation. He said the building was currently in a restricted industrial zone; the proposed amendments would revise the Restricted Industrial zone to allow offices to occupy up to 35% of existing buildings within an Industrial Development park by the site plan review. What the applicant has requested is to utilize a 160,000 square ft. area for the same use as it’s being put to at the present time except the offices would be of principle use and not an accessory use that is required by the existing zones.

It has currently undergone significant renovation with landscaping; it has space for 2100 parking spaces. There will be no change to the entrance, exit or the roadways. It will not create any significant issues. A traffic report was prepared by a traffic consultant that covers the impact of this ordinance which would permit office use that would be principle instead of accessory. The traffic report was done on the entire building and indicated that the impact in the neighboring streets (shown on map) that the level of services on those streets would all stay at the level of service B, or better. Except for the intersection (the left turn) at Strawberry Hill/Norden Place. The existing conditions indicated in the traffic report showed, during the peak hours, that the current level of service is C and it would become a level of service D. There was some concern over the level of reduction and so the traffic consultant provided a set of level of services, similar to the one in the traffic report, but based upon using 200,000 square ft. If 200,000 square ft were to be used then the left turn at the Strawberry Hill/Norden Place would remain at a level of service C.

Attorney Flaherty stated that what the applicant wanted to suggest was that the ordinance be changed by this Commission from 35% to 30%, thereby not causing a drop in the level of service.

Mr. DesRochers asked for any questions or comments from the public.

Mr. Masante from the Chamber of Commerce said that a letter had been submitted and that they were in support of this application.

Ms. Laurel Lindstrom had general comments on traffic regarding the area around Norden Place. She was pleased that the figure had been reduced to 30%. She suggested a focus be made on alternative transport such as carpool and to promote public transportation.

Ms. Diane Lauricella was in support of a zone change at this site. She referred to an article in the Advocate regarding the Master Plan Review.

Attorney Flaherty appreciated all the comments of the public and had taken them into consideration.

Mr. DesRochers closed the public hearing.

__________________________________________________________________________

REPORT ON PLAN REVIEW COMMITTEE, JOSEPH SANTO, CHAIRMAN

1. Action on Items III a, b, c, d, e

1. THAT A SURETY, IN AN AMOUNT TO BE DETERMINED BY THE STAFF, BE SUBMITTED TO GUARANTEE THE INSTALLATION OF THE REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS; AND
2. THAT ALL SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY OR SITE WORK; AND
3. THAT ANY ADDITIONAL SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS, DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE STAFF, BE INSTALLED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE STAFF; AND
4. THAT ANY GRAFFITI ON THE SITE, NOW OR IN THE FUTURE, BE IMMEDIATELY REMOVED; AND
5. THAT A SIGN-OFF BE SUBMITTED FROM THE DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS; AND
6. THAT A CONNECTICUT LICENSED ENGINEER CERTIFY THAT THE REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS WERE INSTALLED TO CITY STANDARDS; AND
7. THAT A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF SPECIAL PERMIT BE FILED ON THE LAND RECORDS.

The motion was approved to continue the hearing to June 19, 2002 during discussion at Public Hearing.

1. THAT ALL REQUIRED EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS ARE IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE SITE; AND
2. THAT ANY GRAFFITI ON THE SITE BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY; AND
3. ALL REQUIRED CEAC SIGNOFFS AE SUBMITTED; AND
4. THAT ALL THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPING BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ZONING COMPLIANCE; AND

** MR. LYONS SECONDED.

** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

1. THAT ALL REQUIRED EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS ARE IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY CONSTURCTION ON THE SITE; AND
2. THAT ANY GRAFFITI ON THE SITE BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY; AND
3. THAT NO TEMPORARY/SEASONAL RETAIL SALES (TYPICALLY FLOWERS/CLOTHING, ETC) OF ANY TYPE ARE ALLOWED ON THE PROPERTY; AND
4. ALL REQUIRED CEAC SIGNOFFS ARE SUBMITTED; AND
5. THAT A SIGN OFF FROM THE STATE BE SUBMITTED VERIFY THAT THE EXISTING DRAINAGE IS ACCEPTABLE; AND
6. THAT NO STORAGE OF ANY KIND OR THE PARKING OF VEHICLES IS TO OCCUR BEHIND THE BUILDING; AND

** MR. LYONS SECONDED.

** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

1. THAT A SURETY, IN AN AMOUNT TO BE DETERMINED BY THE STAFF, BE SUBMITTED TO GUARANTEE THE INSTALLATION OF THE REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS; AND
2. THAT ALL SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO ANY CONSRUCTION ACTIVITY OR SITE WORK; AND
3. THAT ANY ADDITIONAL SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS, DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE STAFF, BE INSTALLED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE STAFF, AND
4. THAT ANY GRAFFITI ON THE SITE, NOW OR IN THE FUTURE, BE IMMEDIATELY REMOVED; AND
5. THAT THE STAFF REVISED LANDSCAPE PLAN BE INCORPORATED INTO THIS APPROVAL; AND
6. THAT A CONNECTICUT LICENSED ENGINEER CERTIFY THAT THE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WERE PROPERLY INSTALLED.

** MR. LYONS SECONDED.

1. THAT ALL REQUIRED EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS ARE IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY CONSTRUCTION; AND
2. THAT ANY GRAFFITI ON THE SITE BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY; AND
3. THAT NO OUTDOOR STORAGE OF VEHICLES OR MATERIAL IS ALLOWED; AND
4. ALL REQUIRED CEAC SIGNOFFS ARE SUBMITTED; AND
5. THAT THE LANDSCAPING PLAN BE MODIFIED TO INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE STREET TREES TO 3-3 ½" CALIPER; AND
6. THAT THE WINDOWS BE ENLARGED AND SHUTTERS ADDED; AND

** MS. LIGHT SECONDED.

** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

4. #16-02CAM – Bistro Du Soleil – 120 Washington St – Convert retail clay shop to restaurant – Report and recommendation.

1. THAT NO BAR FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BE PERMITTED; AND
2. THAT NO LIVE ENTERTAINMENT BE PERMITTED; AND
3. THAT ONLY SIGNS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS AND APPROVED BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ARE PERMITTED; AND
4. THAT ANY GRAFFITI ON THE SITE, NOW OR IN THE FUTURE, BE IMMEDIATELY REMOVED.

** MR. LYONS SECONDED.

** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

4. #X-02SP – Home goods – CT Ave/Richards Ave – Replacement tenant at Bradlees Plaza – Report and recommendation.

1. THAT ALL REQUIRED EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS ARE IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE, START OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE SITE; AND
2. THAT ANY GRAFFITI ON THE SITE BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY;
3. THAT THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THIS APPROVAL AND FAILURE TO RECEIVE THE REQUIRED PERMITS FOR THE INSTAILATION OF THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL AS SHOWN MAKE THIS APPROVAL NULL AND VOID; AND
4. ALL REQUIRED CEAC SIGNOFFS ARE SUBMITTED: AND
5. THAT A SURETY (IN AN AMOUNT TO HE DETERMINED BY STAFF) HE SUBMITTED TO GUARANTEE THE INSTALLATION OF THE REQUIRED SITE IMPROVEMENTS, CONSISTING OF LANDSCAPING, PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS, ETC..; AND
6. THAT THE LANDSCAPING PLAN HE REVISED TO THAT ENTITLED "LANDSCAPING PLAN AS REVISED BY STAFF, DATED MARCH 14, 2002’ AND

** MR. LYONS SECONDED.

** THE MOTION PASSED UNANMIOUSLY.

** MR. LYONS SECONDED.

** THE MOTION PASSED UNANMIOUSLY.

___________________________________________________________________________

REPORT OF ZONING COMMITTEE, MICHAEL LYONS, CHAIRMAN

1. Action on Items III f. and g.

** MR. LYONS MADE A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO JUNE 19, 2002.

** MR. SANTO SECONDED.

** THE MOTION PASSED UNANMIOUSLY.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE REASON FOR THIS ACITON IS:

1. TO IMPLEMENT THE 1990 PLAN OF DEVELOMENT GOAL ‘TO ENCOURAGE OFFICE DEVELOPMENT, WITHIN THE CAPACITY OF INFASTRUCTURE YSTEMS, TO EXPAND EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES" (P.31); AND

1. THAT ALL INTERIOR CHANGES TO ALLOW OFFICES TO OCCUPY UP TO 30% OF EXISTING BUILDINGS WIL NOT REQUIRE A NEW SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION. ANY INTERIOR MODIFICATION TO ALLOW OFFICES TO OCCUPY MORE THAN 30% OF EXISTING BUILDINGS WILL REQUIRE A NEW SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION TO THE ZONING COMMISSION; AND
2. THAT ANY SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THE APPROVED SITE PLAN BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW TO THE ZONING COMMISSION; AND

** MS. LIGHT SECONDED.

Mr. Lyons discussed the differences between the two resolutions (included in the information packet) and wanted to see a definition of the regulations.

Mr. Santa wanted to confirm that the figure had changed from 35% to read 30%.

** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

___________________________________________________________________________

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Mr. Greene stated that the Planning Commission had a hearing the previous evening (May 14, 2002) regarding the Village Districts, there was a light turn out, nobody violently opposed. A second hearing date has not been set.

___________________________________________________________________________

COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSIONERS

No discussion.

___________________________________________________________________________

ADJOURNMENT

** MR. SANTO MADE A MOTION TO ADJOURN

** MS. LIGHT SECONDED.

** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

___________________________________________________________________________

FUTURE MEETINGS

Plan Review Committee Thursday, May 23, 2002 7.30pm – P&Z Conference Room

Zoning Committee Thursday, May 23, 2002 8.00pm – P&Z Conference Room

Plan Review Committee Thursday, June 13, 2002 7.30pm – P&Z Conference Room

Zoning Committee Thursday, June 13, 2002 8.00pm – P&Z Conference Room

Zoning Commission Thursday, June 19, 2002 7.30pm – Common Council Chambers

The meeting adjourned at 10.30pm

Respectfully submitted,

Kate Kye

Telesco Secretarial Services

Back to Previous Page	Back to Home Page