10/27/2021 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS-MEETING MINUTES
WEDNESDAY, October 27, 2021
The public hearing was web-based on Zoom at https://us06web.zoom.us/j/2574297243 
Meeting ID: 257 429 7243

 

I. CALL TO ORDER - Commissioner Antonio called the meeting to order at 7:00pm.

II. ROLL CALL

1. Appointment of Alternates: Ali Rice promoted as a full voting member

Present: Steven Antonio, Mark Freeman, Joshua Michelson, Ram Kaza, Laura Barkowski, and JoAnn Hogan

Absent: Mark Freeman, Sharon Thomas, and Stacey Walczak 

III. APPLICATIONS

1. Public Hearings

Commissioner Antonio made a motion to flip the order of Applications from Application #21-12 of Poyant Signs/Christopher Ramm being presented first to Application #21-13 of Simsbury Public Schools, Owner. Commissioner Hogan seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 

 A. Application #21-13 of Simsbury Public Schools, Owner, SLR International    Corporation, Applicant, for a variance pursuant to the to the Simsbury Zoning Regulations Section 3.9 to allow grandstand and press box within the side yard setback at the property located at 34 Farms Village Road (Assessor’s Map F11, Block 148, Lot 016). Zone R-40

• Kevin Fuselier, Principal Landscape Architect with SLR International Corporation. Presented a PowerPoint that included diagrams of existing and future structures, and pictures that were taken during athletic games that show congestion in the grandstand and press box. Project is for Simsbury High School Campus on the existing green, grandstand, press box, and shed north of the grandstand all on the western side of the property. The proposal is to remove and demolish the existing grandstand, press box, and shed, and build a new grandstand and press box over the existing footprint; keep the CMU building under the grandstand that is used for storage but separate it from the grandstand structure; and make the new structure larger, with the north corner closer to the property line and the new press box moved in a couple of feet. The request for variance is due to the high school property being low density residential, the side yard setback is 40 feet, the existing grandstand was built in the 1960’s and is undersized for the current school population, it is not currently constructed in accordance to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and State of Connecticut Building Code (insufficient means of egress for number of seats, access ramps exceed ADA allowable pitch/slope, insufficient ADA and companion seating areas, inadequate fall protection on railings, and insufficient handrails on stairs), both the existing and proposed  grandstand and press box are located within the 40 foot side yard setback, and the new press box will be further from the property line. Alternatives had been explored, one being retrofitting the existing grandstand to meet current code but considering the age of the structure there was concern that it would not withstand adding more weight and would not meet the school’s need for a larger seating capacity and press box space. Another alternative was reconfiguring the proposed structure to eliminate or lessen the setback of encroachment, but the storage unit is vital to fulfilling the storage needs of the school and is central to the proposed construction. The third alternative was to relocate the grandstand and press box to another location but would not be effective due to the site being confined by existing track and field facility and parking lot on east side and it would have directed spectator and PA noise to the western property line would impact neighbors more.
• Commissioner Antonio inquired if there were any plans to incorporate concessions into the future project considering that the shed that will be removed was the concession stand. Mr. Fuselier said that was not in the project. Jason Casey, Director of Infrastructure and Technology at Simsbury Public Schools, stated that the Athletics Director, Jeff Pinney was okay with losing the concessions shed because it was not heavy utilized. Commissioner Antonio said that if there are any future plans to create a concession area that he would rather see all of the proposed plans now so that we can negotiate the full-scale project.
• Commissioner Antonio also queried about why the proposed project is so heavily based on the cinderblock storage unit under the grandstand. He asked why it would not just be rebuilt when the grandstand structure is going to be built from the ground up anyway. Mr. Fuselier responded that it’s the location for the storage and the type of equipment’s field use. He said that the athletic director wanted the storage to be there. Commissioner Antonio reiterated his implication that the footprint of the proposed grandstand is to facilitate the continued use of the existing storage, and he wanted to understand if demolishing the storage unit completely and moving it would not be a huge cost restraint what would that allow to happen to the overall proposed plan. Mr. Fuselier responded that it would be in a FEMA Flood Plain and if the shed were to be reconstructed it would have to have an open bottom to allow water to flow through which would not be conducive to storing certain athletic equipment. He brought up the feasibility study they did with the athletic department two years ago for a larger storage building elsewhere on site and they examined feasibility and cost estimates and the costs were high, but it might happen in the future. Commissioner Antonio asked what potential ramifications there would be on keeping us out of the setback area if they were to proceed with total demolition.  Mr. Fuselier responded that it would not keep us out of the setback area but would allow for the grandstand structure to be lowered a little bit because it is driving the angle of the seating. The proposal is to match the existing elevation there is just slightly more pitch and more room to allow a new roof on that CMU (storage) building.
• Commissioner Antonio inquired about the walkways, with the switchbacks that he believed were ADA compliant, that are not in the setback, and why they were not going straight, north and south, and why do they have those switchbacks that would further encumber the setback zone. Mr. Fuselier responded that it was a request of Mr. Pinney. Commissioner Antonio asked if that was run by the fire marshal because having four switchbacks to get out in an emergency looks like a fire code concern. Mr. Fuselier responded that the next step would be to go to Zoning with this and that is where the fire marshal would weigh in. Commissioner Antonio asked what the width of the ramp is and Mr. Fuselier responded that it was five feet.
• A member of the public, Bill Freeman commented that him and his wife, Susan Freeman (also present), live on the western property adjacent to the grandstand, across the brook, at 2 Welden Way. Commissoner Antonio commented that they were the closest people and he wondered how this would ramify their property value. Susan Freeman responded that this would impact them greatly. Mr. Freeman said that when they moved there four and a half years ago the sound was horrific and Mr. Pinney had a new sound system installed that was omnidirectional so that it pointed the sound back towards the school and away from their property, and that helped, and he hopes that any future sound systems will continue to do that. He also mentioned that the lights are very visible and was wondering if anything could be done to lower the structure because the boundary between their property and the school’s is a chain link fence and a row of greenery that has eroded from invasive species. He also wanted to know what can be done to enhance the gratery or anything else between the properties so that they are not always looking at the lights and the grandstand. Commissioner Antonio asked Mr. Fuselier and Mr. Casey that if they used energy-efficient lighting if that would be more directionalized. Mr. Fuselier responded that the plan is to use the existing PA system and attach it to the new press box. Mr. Casey responded that the lighting has not been discussed and that the project is all about utilizing existing footprints. Commissioner Hogan asked if the press box reached above the greenery and if the Freemans can see the press box. Mrs. Freeman responded that they could see the top two rows of seats and the press box and that she feels that people who are sitting there can turn around and see her when she is in the kitchen and it feels invasive. Commissioner Hogan responded that the structure was there when they purchased their home and asked if that hedge has changed since then. Mrs. Freeman said that when they first moved in that the greenery was thicker and healthier, that there was a storm where three trees got knocked down by another falling tree, and then there became an open view. She also mentioned that when their neighbors found out that they were attending this meeting that wanted them to advocate for the grandstand to be lowered. Mr. Freeman said that he had landscapers try to remove the vines that have invaded the greenery, but he hopes that the greenery can be enhanced, and they are willing to contribute to that because it effects the value of their home. He said that Mr. Pinney has been helpful about the sound system, but kids have broken into the press box and put on their own music at a very loud volume. Mrs. Freeman said that even the Hopmeadow Country Club has complained of hearing it and that they are in bowl and the sound just ricochets and we can hear everything. Commissioner Antonio asked Mr. Fuselier if there was something prohibiting him from replacing one wall at a time which is allowed for buildings that are nonconforming in the footprint, and this would change the height of the structure. He suggested that the storage unit be kept in the same place but that it is rebuilt one wall at a time and is built a couple of feet lower. Ms. Barkowski commented that anything done in a flood plain that is a substantial improvement, which is anything more than 50% of what the structure is worth, has to be brought up to our Flood Plain Codes. Replacing the storage building would probably be more expensive because she does not think it is up to Flood Plain Codes. Mr. Fuselier confirmed that it was not. Commissioner Antonio inquired if they would be able to replace just the roof. Ms. Barkowski said that it could be reroofed but that it comes down to monetary, and what is considered a substantial improvement. Any kind of work would have to be brought to Mike Glidden the certified Flood Plain Manager of Simsbury. Commissioner Antonio asked if they knocked down a couple of courses but maintained the lower box and left it in place if it would not be changing the value significantly, and how much lower the new structure would be. Mr. Fuselier responded that it would be about two feet. Commissioner Antonio responded they could saw cut because it is viable.
• Commissioner Antonio asked Mr. Freeman what lights he was referring to and Mr. Freeman clarified that it was the field illumination lights. Commissioner Antonio asked if those were the lights that are on poles or on the structure. Mr. Freeman responded that the lights are on independent poles. Commissioner Antonio said that it wouldn’t be discussed during this meeting.
• Mr. Hemsley said that he and David Holden, the former School Business Manager worked on the artificial turf field for two or three years before the first turf field went in, and he mentioned that the lights were a big issue at that time, and they had to go around to surrounding residents and explain to them what was happening. They eventually got the town to comply with Dark Skies, which is a very high set of standards for athletic fields where the light has a very low spill-over rate and it must meet a set of criteria in order to comply with the regulations. There was a lot of work to make sure that they did not have the old-fashioned lights that had a very high spill-over rate. He stated that he has lived closed to the field for forty years but in a high elevation and is looking down on the far end zone and can hear and see everything, so he understands the Freeman’s concerns. He mentioned that when he was a varsity football coach at Simsbury High School that the storage facility got very moldy and musty and he hopes that they can control the humidity in there. He also wanted to know if the concession stand would be replaced. He is happy that the grandstand is going be redone because it is a safety hazard. He also stated that the Visitor stands are very low, and the visitors cannot see the field, and hopes they can be replaced as well.
• Commissioner Hogan inquired if they kept the storage unit as is, is there a way to lower the grandstand as it is proposed to be designed? Mr. Casey responded that he is concerned about lowering it because that would require taking off the top tier which would only add to the already inadequate seating for the larger population. Otherwise, the angle would have to be changed, the seats would have to be pushed back more, and that would bring the structure closer to the set back. Commissioner Hogan asked if they could make the grandstand longer to compensate for the top tier being taken off. Mr. Casey responded that because of the financial component that they have actually been looking at shrinking, so the design is in-flux from side-to-side but how far back has not been an issue. Mr. Fuselier confirmed this. Commissioner Antonio asked why they could not lower it and keep it wide. Mr. Fuselier responded that we could still lose the area by the side boxes, but the press box height would stay the same and be enclosed with solid side and back walls. Mr. Casey commented that with losing the sides and the two top rows it would be a smaller grandstand than the existing one. Commissioner Antonio responded that it wouldn’t be smaller if you kept the sides and lost the two back rows. Mr. Fuselier responded that we could take out the top three rows, but the press box would be at the same height. Commissioner Antonio said when they grant these variances that they are always asking for a reduction of nonconformity.  Residents should also have equal say in how this is constructed. He said that he liked the slide titled “Proposed Improvements-Alternative Site Plan No. 2” because it is a reduction of nonconformity. He said that the switchbacks are still a concern in an emergency and are more than half- way in the setback area, and that is an additional nonconformity. Mr. Casey responded that if the switchback line is straightened that it would follow the fence line of the field and by fire regulation, we wouldn’t be able to have people standing in the way of the grandstand egress. Commissioner Antonio inquired if they set back the fence by five feet it still keeps it substantially out of the setback line.
• Commissioner Rice inquired why the grandstand cannot be longer and is in agreement with Commissioner Hogan and Commissioner Antonio.
• Commissioner Hogan inquired about the height of the press box because that is the part that sticking up and is visible to the neighbors and wants to know why it would be higher than the seating in the proposed plan. Mr. Fuselier responded that the height was because of adding space between the storage facility roof and the grandstand. On the existing structure there is paneling that was added for fall protection under the seats, but that also became the roof of the storage building. That roof is not weatherproof and has contributed to the musty smell in the storage room, along with the holes in the concrete façade, which will all be addressed. Commissioner Hogan asked if the building height could be lowered. Mr. Fuselier responded that it is up to the school, but he believed it could be done. In the proposal the press box is still the same elevation, but it is under the thirty-five-foot building height limit, and the top platform is a limited access filming platform, like a deck with a safety railing on it. There has been discussion of making the back of the railing slightly higher at four feet and keeping the front of the guardrail at three feet.
• Commissioner Kaza wanted to know what was preventing them from taking off the top two rows and extending the length of the grandstand. Commissioner Hogan responded that it helped with the setback issue. Mr. Fuselier commented that Alternative Site Plan No. 2 says it will impact spectators by eliminating those two rows, but it will bring the structure further away from the property line, the press box, in either scenario, will be further from the property line as well. Mr. Casey commented that the concern on this alternate is that cost is a factor, and he is not sure how much is allocated for this and how much it will be with the addition of reconstructing the storage building. Commissioner Antonio responded that the cost issue does not bear on the zoning rights and he is confident that our town has enough to make this the best it can be, not the cheapest it can be.
• Commissioner Antonio asked Ms. Barkowski if they were leaving this application too open ended before proceeding to close it, because it seemed that the general feeling of the Board was for SLR International Corporation to come back after taking the Board’s input into account and resubmitting.
• Commissioner Rice inquired about the length of time and the start and end dates of construction if it is approved or if they need to resubmit with another alternative site plan. Mr. Casey responded the demolition is planned for December with a construction date in the Spring. Commissioner Rice responded that they could come back in a month.
• Mr. Hansley inquired if they ever answered the question about the Visitor’s Stand. Commissioner Antonio responded that it was not a part of this purview and encouraged him to bring it up to the Board of Education because it is valid.
• Commissioner Michelson inquired Mr. Fuselier that Alternative Site Plan No. 2 was preliminary and that he did not have any specific information on capacity. Mr. Fuselier responded that was correct. Commissioner Michelson responded that if we want the plan to include that information, we need to push this back anyway.

 

MOTION: Commissioner Antonio made the motion to reschedule Application #21-13 of Simsbury Public Schools, Owner, SLR International Corporation, Applicant, for a variance pursuant to the to the Simsbury Zoning Regulations Section 3.9 to allow grandstand and press box within the side yard setback at the property located at 34 Farms Village Road (Assessor’s Map F11, Block 148, Lot 016). Zone R-40 for their next regular meeting. He would like SLR International Corporation to take the Board’s input into consideration. The Board would like the same or less variance from the setback lines with the proposed plan.Commissioner Hogan seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

 

B. Application #21-12 of Poyant Signs/Christopher Ramm, Applicant, Antonio5, LLC/Steven Antonio for a variance pursuant to the Simsbury Zoning Regulations Section 9.3 to replace the existing menu board with a drive thru internally illuminated digital menu board at the property located at 1261 Hopmeadow Street (Assessor’s Map I05, Block 403, and Lot 019). Zone B-2

• Bill Gavigan of Poyant Signs they are the sign manufacturer for Dunkin Donuts. He stated that the zoning regulations does not currently allow for internally illuminated signage. The menu board is the order point in the drive thru line and not necessarily branding. The new image for Dunkin Donuts is to rebrand themselves as Dunkin and to utilize new digital technology. He understands towns not wanting digital signs by the roads. The type of board that Dunkin wants is essentially a TV screen that is regulated, with the brightness being adjustable. They self-adjust with the ambient light, so at night the light will dim down because not as much light is needed for these screens as it is during the day when it is fighting against the sun. The current static signs have problems where the light can go out in different sections or look sloppy when the components or frame falls out. These new signs are clean, crisp, even and they are going to continue this way. Like a TV if there is a problem the whole thing just won’t work, and they will urgently correct that so that patrons can read the menu and keep the line moving. Dunkin wants to bring their signs up to the brand standard. According to research this has led to a better drive thru experience for the customers.
• Commissioner Raza inquired if Mr. Gavigan had a display to show what it would look like. Commissioner Antonio added that he had a question and showed the page in the packet that had one display proposal, the two screens with the column in the middle. He then flipped to another page with the other display option that had a separate pole that you order from and two screens next to it.  Mr. Gavigan responded that there are two layout options for the drive thru, the first one with the two separate pieces, the separate menu board and the canopy, the canopy is considered the order point, the speaker is inside a vertical column. 5.5 feet away angled so that when a patron pulls up, they see the menu separate. Dunkin wants to do an all-in-one so that there is a smaller footprint to have the variance granted. Commissioner Antonio asked if this was the same one that they had already approved for the Dunkin in West Simsbury. Mr. Gavigan responded that the one on the Albany Turnpike is the two-piece option, the canopy with the separate menu.
• Commissioner Antonio said that they have also been presented with this by McDonald’s and inquired Mr. Gavigan if he knew if they had the two piece or one piece. Mr. Gavigan responded that he has only seen the two-piece option.
• Commissioner Hogan inquired where the sign was going to face, the road Route 10, or would it be perpendicular to Route 10? Mr. Gavigan responded that it would be in the same spot as the existing menu board, which is straight to the curb and is just pass the radius so is not directly facing back but is on an angle so that you won’t see those screens from the street. There are also trees in the back. Commissioner Antonio commented that it is behind the building and that the whole building blocks it.
• Commissioner Antonio inquired if this proposal would be a reduction in size for the menu board. Mr. Gavigan responded that it would be. Commissioner Hogan inquired if it would be taller. Mr. Gavigan responded that with the canopy would be taller with a ten-foot clearance, but the menu board would be smaller at about six feet in height and about six feet in width. The current menu board is about seven-and-a-half-feet in height and is much wider at eleven feet.  
• Commissioner Michelson inquired asked about the frequency that the sign would be changing. Mr. Gavigan responded that it is a menu board, and nothing moves, scrolls, or changes, but in the bottom corner there is a menu confirmation screen, so as a patron places an order the items that are ordered will show and gives you a monetary total.
• Commissioner Rice inquired about the purpose in variance. Mr. Gavigan responded that they are seeking variance to the internally illuminated sign. Commissioner Hogan commented that it is currently not in compliance.
• Commissioner Antonio spoke about reading the hardships and that it would be safer for these signs to be changed. Mr. Gavigan responded that currently a Dunkin employee has to go outside and open up the menu sign and change this inside the box, with traffic coming, and weather conditions. With the new sign a manager can change the sign remotely.
• Commissioner Kaza inquired about this being a requirement of the Dunkin franchise. Mr. Gavigan responded that being a national brand it is now one of their brand standards, not just outside, but inside. It is all meant to enhance the customer experience and speed up the process.
• Commissioner Antonio said that he was going to close the application and inquired Ms. Barkowski if Commissioner Hogan should step in as Deputy Chair due to him having conflict of interests. Ms. Barkowski said that since he is recusing himself it would be fine for her to handle it.

 

MOTION: Commissioner Hogan made a motion to close discussion on Application #21-12 of Poyant Signs/Christopher Ramm, Applicant, Antonio5, LLC/Steven Antonio for a variance pursuant to the Simsbury Zoning Regulations Section 9.3 to replace the existing menu board with a drive thru internally illuminated digital menu board at the property located at 1261 Hopmeadow Street (Assessor’s Map I05, Block 403, and Lot 019). Zone B-2 .

Commissioner Michelson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

 

 

2. Discussion and Possible Action

C. Application #21-12 of Poyant Signs/Christopher Ramm, Applicant, Antonio5, LLC/Steven Antonio for a variance pursuant to the Simsbury Zoning Regulations Section 9.3 to replace the existing menu board with a drive thru internally illuminated digital menu board at the property located at 1261 Hopmeadow Street (Assessor’s Map I05, Block 403, and Lot 019). Zone B-2

 

• Commissioner Michelson stated that when he spoke about the February meeting when they discussed the sign for Dunkin on Route 44, how they could bring up the rules regarding these specific menu boards with the Zoning Commission because it continually comes up and should just be addressed in code for the internal lighting as an exception to the regulation. Commissioner Hogan responded that one of the advantages for keeping it as it is, is that each individual sign can be considered for its own merits because different companies will come to us with different norms they are trying to set for their company, and it can become a slippery slope for them to be allowed under one blanket Not having internally lit signage is a long standing tradition in Simsbury and one of the reasons that our main road is so pleasant to drive down because we don’t have a lot of that commercial signage happening. Allowing the Zoning Board of Appeals to weigh in on it individually is an advantage because so many businesses are coming and going, and technology is always changing and losing control over these decisions would not be beneficial.
• Commissioner Rice brought up how the safety of employees will be enhanced how the sign would not be facing the road and would be smaller and the trees and Dunkin building blocking the sign are all good aspect for the Board to consider for this proposal. Commissioner Hogan liked how the brightness of the sign would adjust to the atmosphere and how it doesn’t change throughout the day.

 

MOTION: Commissioner Hogan made a motion to approve Application #21-12 of Poyant Signs/Christopher Ramm, Applicant, Antonio5, LLC/Steven Antonio for a variance pursuant to the Simsbury Zoning Regulations Section 9.3 to replace the existing menu board with a drive thru internally illuminated digital menu board at the property located at 1261 Hopmeadow Street (Assessor’s Map I05, Block 403, and Lot 019). Zone B-2, with the hardships being that this is the company standard for this restaurant, and this brings the restaurant into the accepted technology, menu item pricing would be able to be changed remotely so as not to require a person to go out to physically change the board.

Commissioner Michelson seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously.   

IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the WEDNESDAY August 25, 2021 regular meeting.

Commissioner Antonio made a motion to approve the minutes from the August 25, 2021 regular scheduled meetings as presented. Commissioner Hogan seconded. The motion carried unanimously.

V. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Hogan made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Antonio seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:13 pm.

Respectfully Submitted,

Amanda Blaze

Commission Clerk