October 5th’s marathon P&Z meeting brought several town issues into sharp focus, and it was encouraging to see such a high level of community concern and engagement.
❗️Both the Shepardson Auditorium and the overflow room next door were filled, and at least 55 people logged on to the Zoom call. There was excellent sound and video coverage provided by the town, which really helped the audience hear and see the complex presentations.
❗️During the public hearings for the Southford Park, LLC applications (#23-58Z, #23-59Z and #23-60Z), the public was limited to three minutes for comments. Several speakers pointed out that this is a huge project and the public has a lot to comment on that doesn’t fit into three minutes, but the Commission stood firm on the limit: there was a timer and a buzzer if someone ran overtime and the microphone was cut off shortly after time expired. Speakers were encouraged to return to the continued public hearings at the November P&Z meeting to give additional comments as necessary, or to submit written comments.
❗️Developer Norman Drubner testified that he loves Middlebury, raised his family here, and would never do anything to harm the town. He also clarified that local resident Dean Yimoyines is not involved with the project.
❗️The CEO of Atlantic Management, Joseph Zink, commented that the site could have been developed with several more buildings, but that the 35 acre buffer was always important to the project to set it off the road and away from the public view.
Public concern touched on the following:
‼️The traffic study’s choice of intersections and survey date (one was during a school vacation). The intersection of Judd Rd and 188 (the road to PHS) is rated an F in Level of Service (LOS), and this non-signalized intersection can only get more dangerous with the addition of truck traffic. Also, the study surveyed traffic during non-school hours, which ignores school traffic at LMES and PHS.
‼️The graphic renderings of the project do not show the view from the Benson Woods side of the project. Since the already-approved-2nd-phase puts new homes in close proximity to both buildings, and the loading bays are on the same side as these new homes, the renderings are not an accurate depiction of project impact.
‼️The Applicant’s continued insistence that there is no known tenant so the use of the building can’t be defined is a direct contradiction to Middlebury’s Planning and Zoning regulations. There must be specific, direct evidence that the use of the building complies with our regulations. If an applicant can’t definitely prove this connection, then a site plan application needs to wait until the tenant is known and the use can be verified. To be really clear, it’s not WHO is using the building that’s important to define, it’s WHAT is using the building. For example, the Republican-American keeps calling the project a food distribution facility. There could be a number of brands that might want to use such a place, so is it cold and non-cold storage? Is this a mid-supply chain warehouse for imported foods or something closer to final distribution? Those kinds of questions can and should be answered no matter which specific company ends up in the space (Bozzutos, Sysco, Amazon Fresh, Restaurant Depot, US Foods, etc.).
‼️Industrial Flex Space is not defined in our regulations, so it is not a permitted use. While Warehousing is a permitted use, it is not defined, but warehouse is defined (“a building used primarily for storage of goods and materials prior to distribution that are produced in conjunction with a manufacturing facility) and trucking terminals are prohibited unless connected to on-site manufacturing. Taken together, the intent of the regulations clearly ties warehousing to on-site manufacturing. If the project needed a text amendment in January to add distribution facilities as a permitted use, no one is buying the idea that the project suddenly complies with our regulations some nine months of opposition later.
‼️Many residents are against the town of Middlebury accepting the Conservation Easement for this project.
‼️A protest petition per Conn.Gen.Stat. §8-3(b) was handed in to the Commission: the law states "If a protest against a proposed change is filed at or before a hearing with the zoning commission, signed by the owners of twenty per cent or more of the area of the lots included in such proposed change or of the lots within five hundred feet in all directions of the property included in the proposed change, such change shall not be adopted except by a vote of two-thirds of all the members of the commission.” In plain language, the property owners bordering the LI-200 zone object to the height text amendment change, therefore the Planning and Zoning Commission cannot approve the height change by a simply majority vote, it can only approve the height change with a 2/3 or super-majority vote.
The Planning and Zoning Commissioners asked several of their own questions:
❓Chairman Terry Smith agreed that the Commission had an obligation to protect Benson Woods residents, and asked for renderings showing the project from the west side where the second phase would be built.
❓Vice Chairman Bill Stowell and Commissioner Erika Carrington were very concerned about the traffic study and the lack of consideration for school traffic hours. Stowell asked for additional traffic studies at the times and intersections that PHS and LMES start school and release from school (this is Judd Rd/188 and N. Benson/188).
❓Several Commissioners asked about the use of the building, commenting on the unusual course of asking for site plan approval without knowing how the building is being used.
All three Southford Park, LLC hearings are continued to the November 2nd Planning and Zoning Meeting. Because the public hearing was continued, written comments can still be submitted to pandz@middlebury-ct.org. There were 4 new applications on the agenda, most if not all were scheduled for the December 1st P&Z meeting.
At the very end of the meeting, Vice Chairman Stowell asked to talk about the electric sign at the Consignment Shop. He was concerned that Dean Yimoyines wasn't adhering to the conditions placed on approval of the sign (one message per week). Stowell said he stopped by to watch the sign earlier in the day and timed 5 messages running at 10 seconds each. Stowell wanted ZEO Curt Bosco to issue a cease and desist for operation of the sign, saying that he didn't like that the Commission was being disobeyed. ZEO Bosco said that he believed the town attorney and Mr. Yimoyines' attorney were supposed to be meeting, but Stowell interrupted and said he didn't care about attorneys, he wanted the rules followed and a cease and desist sent.
Next P&Z meeting is Thursday, November 2nd at 7pm, probably in the Shepardson Auditorium.
Follow This Blog
