Chairman Martin Atkins called the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.

Other members present: Matthew Blinstrubas, Carl Graveline (7:10 p.m.), Jeffrey Slapikas (7:06 p.m.)

Alternates present: George Havican

Members absent: Betty Lou Holley (Alt.), Dominic Morelli (Alt.)

Also present: William Donovan, Land Use Inspector/Clerk

Chairman Atkins seated G. Havican for the vacant board member's position yet to be filled.

CORRESPONDENCE: Chairman Atkins stated two letters are on file pertaining to tonight's public hearings, and will be entered into the record at the public hearing.

CLERICAL BILL: Motion by M. Blinstrubas seconded by G. Havican to to pay the clerical bill. Unanimous.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Motion by C. Graveline, seconded by J. Slapikas to approve the ZBA minutes of the May 25, 2004 meeting as amended. Three votes in favor with one abstention. Motion to approve carries.

NEW BUSINESS: None

PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. 7:14 p.m. (Scheduled for 7:10 p.m.) Application 7-2004: N & N, LLC (Glenn Noble as Agent), 9 Gramar Avenue. Seeking a 14-foot sideline to construct a 30" x 45" truck storage shed. Chairman Atkins read into the record the "Notice of Public Hearings" as it appeared in the Republican American of June 12 & 18, 2004. Mr. Noble stated he is proposing to construct a detached 3 sided 30' x 45' truck shed to house propant vehicles and equipment that cannot otherwise be stored inside an enclosed building for safety purposes. Mr. Noble is seeking a 14-foot sideline variance. The property is unique in shape in that it is pie-shaped: wide in the front and narrow in the rear. The proposed shed cannot be attached to the existing building because fire codes require propane be stored a minimum distance of 10 feet from the main structure. Mr. Noble stated additional surveying indicates it may be possible to bring the shed farther from the rear property line and consequently farther from the sideline, however he does not wish to change his variance request at this time. Chairman Atkins asked if the buildings could be shifted 90 degrees vertical to reduce the variance. Mr. Noble stated the steep slopes of the sideslines plus parking requirements and emergency access requirements around the building limit the shed to where it is propsed. The largest truck Mr. Noble currently has is 28 feet long, thus the request for a 30 foot in width building. There were no further comments from the board and no comments from the public. The public hearing closed at 7:22 p.m.

b. 7:22 p.m. (Scheduled for 7:20 p.m.) Application 8-2004: Timothy & Kathy Francois, 121 Cook Road. Seeking a 5-foot sideline and a "rear range line of house" variance to construct a 12' x 24' utility building. Chairman Atkins read into the record the "Notice of Public Hearings" as it appeared in the Republican American on June 12 & 18, 2004. Chairman Atkins further acknowledged correspondence received from Richard Angelicola, 119 Cook Road pertaining to the application. Chairman Atkins recused himself from taking part in the public hearing due to a conflict of interest. Jeffrey Slapikas was seated as Chairman for this application and read into the record the letter from Mr. Angelicola that stated his opposition to the variances as requested. M. Francois stated they would like to install a 12' x 24' utility building at the apron or turn-around of their driveway. The building would be used to sore driveway maintenance items, lawn mowers, children's bikes, etc. Placing the building adjacent to the garage would limit access to the backyard area including the septic system. The back yard drops off towards the rear and also contains wetlands. There are maple trees located behind where the building would be placed that would help obscure the view at the neighboring Angelicola residence. Mr. Francois stated in response toe Mr. Angelicola's letter that he is not aware of any boundry line dispute between the two properties. C. Graveline asked in the building could be re-located approximately 10 feet to the rear however, this would deteriorate the buildings' aesthetic placement to the driveway and surrounding area and also limit what they feel is the storage space needed with this structure. J. Slapikas asked where the yard begins to slope off in the rear. Mr. Francois stated in the north corner of the property, however there is a general slope with the entire parcel...just more so in the rear. Access to the rear of the house from the right side for septic work is limited because of a 3-foot retaining wall and pitch of the land. This is a rear lot, and the building would be approximately 300' from Cook Road. There would be no further comments from the board and no comments from the public. The public hearing closed at 7:37 p.m.

Martin Atkins resumed the Chairman's position.

c. 7:38 p.m. (Scheduled for 7:30 p.m.) Application 9-2004: C.V.S. Pharmacy, (Courtney Nawrot as Agent,) 73 Waterbury Road. Seeking variances of the commercial sign regulations to allow an "Electronic Message Board" sign to be placed unded the existing detached "CVS" sign and relocate both signs closer to Route 69. Chairman Atkins read into the record the "Notice of Public Hearings" as it appeard in the Republican American on June 12 & 18, 2004. Ms. Nawrot stated she is requesting a reduction in the original overall square footage request from 23 square feet to 18 square feet for an electronic message center. The proposal is to install an electronic message center with a timed interval change of once every minute to allow messages such as "blood pressure screening", "flu shots", time & temp messages along with store specials to be relayed to the community. The message center is not a flashing, moving, intermittent sign, and has lowlight luminary output. There will be no scrolling or animations. Ms. Nawrot stated studies conducted by the Federal Highway Administration show no correlation between electronic message centers and an increase in accidents. Ms. Nawrot further stated the CT DOT is increasing use of electronic message centers on major highways to better inform motorists of traffic delays and weather hazards. The sign will be displayed during normal working hours, shutting down when the store closes at night (9:00 p.m.). CVS is seeking to move the sign closer to the street because of an existing sign on the neighboring used car dealership that blocks visibility of the sign when traveling north on Waterbury Road. Chairman Atkins asked for explanation of the hardship. Ms. Nawrot stated this is new technology and companies need to be better identified for the services they offer. Good visibility of the sign is necessary to reduce the potential for a traffic accident. Chairman Atkins stated signs normally identify the business, not all the services offered. Chairman Atkins expressed concern with the number of serious accidents that have already occured at the CVS/Route 69 intersection and whether this type of sign, designed to get motorist's attention, would cause additional traffic-related casualties. Ms. Nawrot responded that most people react to that which is most relevant at the time, meaning they would concentrate on avoiding an accident rather tahn reading a sign. Chairman Atkins asked if this type of sign could be placed on the building or window. Ms. Nawrot stated it can be mounted on a wall. C. Graveline asked for clarification on what variances are being sought. Ms. Nawrot stated the primary desire is to allow extra square footage for a message board sign. If the board was so inclined, CVS would withdraw the variance request to move both signs closer to Route 69. M. Blinstrubas asked why offering more than one service to the public is a unique business. Ms. Nawrot replied CVS offers a pharmacy, photo developing and general merchandise, whereas a used car dealership offers cars and a gas station provides gasoline. There were no further comments from the board. The hearing closed at 8:02 p.m.

NEW BUSINESS: None.

ACTION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. C. Graveline called for a motion to approve Application 7-2004 of N & N Realty, 9 Gramar Avenue for a 14-foot variance to construct a detached truck storage shed. Seconded by M. Blinstrubas. Discussion: J. Slapikas stated he understands the need to maintain truck access around the building and is aware of the sharp difference in grade between this property and the abutting property. Also, because this is a three sided building, in an industrial zone and to be placed in the back of the lot he sees no conflict with the neighboring properties or zoning. M. Blinstrubas and C. Graveline both concurred wiht J. Slapikas. Chairman Atkins also stated moving the building vertically could impact emergency access to the rear of the property. Chairman Atkins calls for a vote. In facor: Unanimous. Reasons: Unusual shape of the lot, safety concerns for propane storage, required emergency access.

b. C Graveline called for a motion to approve Application 8-2004 of Timothy & Francois, 121 Cook Road for a 5-foot sideline and a "rear range line of house" variance to install a 12' x 24' utility building. Seconded by G. Havican. (Note: Chairman Atkins excused himself from participating in this discussion and vote.) Discussion: J. Slapikas stated other rear lots have received variances for similar structures. He does not agree that aesthetics should be a viable reason for granting a variance, but does recognize the need to be able to access the rear yard for septic repairs and othe rmaintenance necessities. B. Donovan mentioned effective July 1st, new zoning regulations allow a structure of this type to be located 20-feet from a sideline, thereby eliminating the need for the 5-foot sideline variance requested in this application. M. Blinstrubas agreed that aesthetics is not a hardship. C. Graveline stated he generally does not have a problem with a utility building being placed forward of the rear range line of a house on a rear lot. M. Blinstrubas asked if a restriction to the rear yard on both sides of the house is valid. J. Slapikas called for a vote. In favor: Unanimous (4 votes). Reasons: Limitations on access to rear lot, slope/wetlands in the rear, well and septic location.

c. M. Blinstrubas called for a motion to approve Application 9-2004 of CVS Pharmacy, 73 Waterbury Road for an 18-square foot and a 5-foot property line distance variance for installation of a message board sign to be located underneath the existing detached CVS sign. Seconded by G. Havican. Discussion: C. Graveline is not in favor of an additional 5-foot front property line variance. He feels the sign is now close enough to Route 69. He is also not in favor of flashing signs or any type of light movement, but appreciates the proposed reduction in size of the sign. J. Slapikas concurs. He supports commercial business in town but does not see a hardship in adding an additional sign or moving both signs closer to the street. M. Blinstrubas also agrees and does not feel the hardship stated is unique. Chairman Atkins feels the proper way to get a larger sign is to seek amendments to the zoning regulations. His concern is if one business is granted a variance, most other businesses will then seek similar variances for their signs, pointing to the variance granted as reason enough for granting their sign variance as well. C. Graveline stated he feels the CVS sign is fine the way it is. J. Slapikas mentioned the dangerous area CVS is located in relative to traffic attempting to turn into as a result. B. Donovan mentioned that other businesses, like Shell for instance, offer a multiple service as does CVS and does not have a message board sign. Chairman Atkins called for a vote. In favor: None Opposed: Unanimous. Motion to approve is denied. Reasons: There is no justified hardship for an additional sign.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None

ADJOURNMENT: Motion by M. Blinstrubas, seconded by J. Slapikas to adjourn at 8:57 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Martin Atkins
Chairman