City Council - Zoning Committee

City of Chicopee City Council Zoning Committee Approved 10-27-2021 Members George Balakier, Chair James Tillotson, Vice Chair Fred Krampits Frank Laflamme Jerry Roy Stan Walczak Gary Labrie MINUTES September 29, 2021 The following are the minutes of a public hearing held Wednesday, September 29, 2021 at 6:30 PM in the Chambers, 4th floor, City Hall Annex, 274 Front Street, Chicopee, MA 01013 and via Zoom. Members Present: Balakier, Tillotson, Krampits, Laflamme, Roy, Walczak, Labrie Also Present: Daniel Garvey (Associate City Solicitor), Chris Casali (IT), Lee Pouliot (Planning Director) The meeting was called to order at 6:30 PM In compliance with the Open Meeting Law the Vice-Chair asked if anyone in the audience was recording the meeting. Hearing none the meeting continued. ITEM #1 Application for a Special Permit under Chapter 275-50 (C) (2) & 50 (C) (1) for the purpose of replacing existing 24 square feet lawn sign with new electronic message lawn sign (same location) and to waive one front setback requirement from 25’ to 8’ located at 435 Burnett Road. Applicant Gary Moren Moren Signs, Inc. 101 Ramah Circle South Agawam, MA 01001 Gary Moren was present at the meeting. He stated that Westfield Bank is in the process of updating their signs at various locations. Reports read from the following departments: 1 Planning Department – Property is zoned Business B; relief of setback requirements for new sign placement from 25 feet to +/- feet from the property line requires a Special Permit; Digital accessory signs in Industrial Districts require a Special Permit; Applicant is looking to obtain a Special Permit fro he addition of a digital sign; signs with visible moving, revolving or rotating parts or visible mechanical movement of any description or other apparent visible movement achieved by electrical, electronic or mechanical means, and all animated and electronically activated changeable signs except for time, temperature, and date signs require a Special Permit; Planning sees no issue with the proposed digital sign as well as the relief of setback requirements – Council should consider limitations on how often (timing) screens are allowed to change; and Planning recommends approval of the Special Permit. Building Department – The subject property is zoned Business A. As stated in the application, the required sign setback under 275-59 is 25 feet with a sign area not to exceed 60 square feet per side. The proposed sign is smaller than the maximum size permitted. The existing sign does not seem to create an issue with visibility along Burnett Road or for vehicles exiting the bank parking lot. The Building Department has no concerns with the proposed change of the existing sign to an electronic message board. A sign permit and recording of the special permit if approved will be required to secure the sign permit. Engineering Department – Proposed sign location is in direct alignment with traffic signals for eastbound vehicles on Burnett Road. Flashing and/or changing messages on a lighted sign poses a conflict with traffic signals, adds confusion for drivers, and creates a potential safety hazard. Not recommended. Fire Department – None Councilor Laflamme stated that he would like to see that the 8 second rule be included in the conditions for this Special Permit. Councilor Walczak stated that he would like to see the sign turned off at 11 PM. Public Input via Zoom Cathy Joselyn, Marketing Director for Westfield Bank, stated that the bank is doing these type of signs at other locations. The message will not be flashing. The message stays constant for about 10 seconds before it changes to the next. The Liberty Street sign has been in place for about a year and there have been no issues. CONDITIONS Permit to run with the applicant 10 second delay No flashing messages If there is an issue the permit will be called in Motion made by Councilor Laflamme and second by Councilor Balakier to approve with conditions. Committee vote 7 – 0 favorable. 2 ITEM #2 Application for a Special Permit under Chapter 275-22 C for the purpose of reconstruction of a two family structure on a non-conforming Res A lot – Section 3 finding for a non-conforming use located at 115 Davenport Street. Applicant MS Homes, LLC Sergey Savonin, owner 21 West School Street Westfield, MA 01089 James Ferrera, representing Sergey Savonin was present. He stated that the intent is to reconstruct a 2 family dwelling on a non-conforming lot. The property has many code violations and the applicant will demolish the structure and reconstruct on existing foundation. Reports read from the following department: Planning Department – Property is zoned Residential A; the existing two-family structure is likely a legally nonconforming use on a legally nonconforming lot (i.e. parcel is undersized); Applicant is looking to obtain a special permit to allow for the reconstruction of the existing two-family which is in poor condition; The proposed use will not be more obnoxious, as it maintains two residential units with a neighborhood of mixed density residential structures; Planning sees no issue with the proposed Special Permit; and Planning recommends approval of the Special Permit with concurrence of Building Department. Fire Department – Applicant shall adhere to all required and applicable fire laws and code per MGL Ch 148 and 527 CMR. Engineering – Attached plan does not show any proposed work on the site. If site work is proposed, must be shown on a plan. Building Department – 115 Davenport Street is a 5000 square foot lot with 50 feet of frontage, zoned Residence A and containing a 2 story 2 family dwelling with an unfinished attic. The property was abandoned and not been maintained for many years by its prior owner. The existing structure is in poor condition and will require reconstruction of portions of the walls and roof system as part of any renovation. The current owner has proposed to reconstruct the 2 family dwelling rather than attempt to renovate the existing structure, provided that he is able to rebuild a 2 family dwelling. The owner has discussed the possibility of reusing the existing masonry foundation for the new home. Feasibility to reuse the foundation will be reviewed after demolition is completed, should the special permit be issued. The setback of the existing home to the North East property line is less than 4 feet. The current side yard setback requirement in the Residence A district is 6 feet. The Building Department has no objection to the structure being allowed to be rebuilt as opposed to repaired and renovated. If the foundation cannot be reused, we request that a condition of approval is for the side yard setback of the new structure to be a minimum of 6 feet. Mr. Ferrera stated that the applicant would like to obtain approval to demo first before a plan is drawn. Councilor Laflamme asked why the applicant could not use a new foundation. Lee Pouliot stated that if a new foundation is constructed it will require side yard setback to be minimum of 6 feet. 3 Public Input Larry Bourdeau, 134 Davenport Street, stated that he supports the structure being torn down. He wanted to know if it will remain a 2 family. He is concerned that the rodents currently in the structure will relocate in the neighboring properties once the structure is demolished. CONDITIONS Permit to run with the land The approval of all Planning and Building Department regarding the foundation status Approval of Health Department inspection concerning rodents Motion made by Councilor Laflamme and second by Councilor Balakier to approve with conditions. Committee vote 7 – 0 favorable. ITEM #3 Application for a Special Permit under Chapter 275-9 / 62 (B) (25) for the purpose of a proposed redevelopment project – to redevelop a portion of the site (in the area of the slab foundation remnants) to construct a new 156,000 +/- SF industrial building and associated parking/loading areas and grassed/landscaped area at 425 Meadow Street. Applicant CPI 425 Meadow Street, LLC Jeff Checkoway 30 Speen Street Framingham, MA 01701 Richard Kos, Steve Glowacki, and Jeff Checkoway were present at the meeting. This property is located off Meadow Street at the corner of McKinstry Avenue. The property is approximately 46.25 +/- acres in size. The lot consists of multiple industrial buildings with associated paved parking, limited landscaping and the slab foundation remnants of razed buildings. The proposed redevelopment includes the construction of an approximately 156,000 +/- square foot warehouse, with associated parking and loading areas on the southern portion of the site. The existing buildings, parking and loading areas are proposed to remain with landscaped traffic islands proposed to enhance traffic patterns on site and reduce impervious area. Reports read from the following: Building Department – 425 Meadow Street is zoned Industrial. Motor freight transportation is permitted by special permit within the Business B district and therefore by 275-62 (B) (25) of the City code. 275-9 of the City Code states that: Special Permits shall be issued only for uses that are in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinances and shall be subject to general and specific terms set forth therein. Such permits shall also impose conditions, safeguards and limitations on time or use. Is motor freight transportation at this location in harmony with the neighborhood as well as the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinances? 4 Fire Department – None at this time. Will look to see (FDC connection, possible hydrant location and fire truck turning radius) Engineering Department – No Engineering comments for special permit. Engineering comments deferred to site plan review process. Planning Department – Property is zoned Industrial; warehousing and storage projects require a Special Permit under 275-62 (B) (25). Property has a history of manufacturing uses, however is currently vacant (previous structures were demolished circa 2003. Project will require both Preliminary Site Plan Review and Definitive Site Plan Review with the Chicopee Planning Board should the Special Permit be granted by City Council. Applicant to confirm that the project does not trigger review under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). Applicant to provide Planning Board documentation regarding Brownsfield/Environmental closeout to confirm all required environmental assessment and cleanup activities have been completed and all required filings with MassDEP have been completed. Property was identified as a catalyst site in the recently awarded US EPA Brownsfields Assessment Grant for the Willimansett Neighborhood with the following granted noted in the grant proposal for this site:  The Calloway facility is a 13.5 acre vacant lot in the heart of Willimansett. The facility was part of a larger contiguous manufacturing operation that housed the headquarters of Spaulding Sports Worldwide. Spaulding eventually left and the Calloway facility downsized rendering large parts of the facility vacant. The facility at 521 Meadow Street succumbed to its obsolescence and was demolished in 2003 and has remained vacant. According to the WUI (Willimansett Urban Initiative), the site was determined to be the highest priority for assessment due to its polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) contamination and reportable levels of heavy metals within 500 feet of houses, schools and playgrounds. It was prioritized the other 16 ABI (Area of Brownsfields Interest) for its ability to support large-scale economic development projects that could be catalytic within the neighborhood.  Further, “the former Calloway Manufacturing Facility (Priority Brownsfield Site) has been identified for its ability to support a large scale project that could inject needed economic development and vibrancy into a disadvantaged neighborhood due to its location in the heart of Willimansett. A grocery store located in walking distance of a dense residential neighborhood underserved by a lack of local amenities and classified as a food desert would be a redevelopment opportunity that addresses contemporary community needs” Property is located within a densely populated Environmental Justice neighborhood that is underserved and includes a number of sensitive populations.  “Environmental justice is based on the principle that all people have a right to be protected from environmental hazards and to live in and enjoy a clean and healthful environment regardless of race, color, national origin, income , or English language proficiency. Environmental justice is the equal protection and meaningful involvement of all people and communities with respect to the developments, implantation, and enforcement of energy, climate change, and environmental laws, regulations, and policies and the equitable distribution of energy and environmental benefits and burdens” Environmental Justice Policy of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs – June 24, 2021. This project site has the opportunity to catalyze significant economic development within the Willimansett neighborhood and to address the environmental burdens that are experienced by the neighborhood’s Environmental Justice populations. The project site could easily support the proposed warehouse project and additional land use(s) that directly address needs identified by the neighborhood (for example food access) to directly benefit and mitigate a long history of industrial/manufacturing uses within the neighborhood; and 5 Should the City Council be inclined to grant the Special Permit, Planning recommends that is be conditioned on the Applicant developing a land use plan that includes space to address an prioritized need within the neighborhood as identified through community outreach and existing planning documents. Lee stated that this is just the first step in the project. The project will need to go through a public hearing with the Planning Board. Councilor Laflamme stated that the applicant is not looking for any TIFs from the City. CONDITIONS Permit to run with the land Approve with SPRAC review Motion made by Councilor Laflamme and second by Councilor Balakier to approve with conditions. Committee vote 7 – 0 favorable. ITEM #4 Application for a Special Permit under Chapter 275-62 B 25 for the purpose of constructing a self-storage facility with associated office space in an Industrial District located on Shawinigan Drive (Parcel ID 0187- 0001B). Applicant JLL Real Estate, LLC Rich Kowalski 5 Wandering Meadows Wilbraham, MA 01095 Rich Kowalski and Don Frydryck (Sherman & Frydryk Engineering) were present at the meeting. Mr. Frydryck stated that the proposal is for 9 storage buildings ranging from 2,700 square feet to 7,400 square feet. There will be one access to the site, lighting on the buildings and on-site drainage system. Reports were read from the following departments: Planning Department – Property is zoned Industrial; construction of a self-storage facility with associated office space is an Industrial District requires a Special Permit, due to the fact it is permissible in Business B district. Provided site plans proposed work within the 100’ Wetland Buffer, project would require a minimum submission of a Request for Determination of Applicability with the Chicopee Conservation Commission if the Special Permit is granted. Should the Special Permit be granted, this project will require a Preliminary Site Plan Review and a Definitive Site Plan Review with the Planning Board prior to being eligible for Building Permits. Proper formula for parking calculations is warehousing and storage. City Council will need to determine whether or not the proposed use is the “most appropriate” use of this currently undeveloped Industrial zoned parcel. Self-storage as a land use is not known to create significant number of jobs or economic vitality. Engineering Department – No Engineering comments for Special Permit. Engineering comments deferred to site plan review process. 6 Building Department – The subject property is zoned industrial. Warehousing and storage are each uses that may be allowed by Special Permit within the Business B zoning district. 275-62B (25) allows that uses that may be granted a special permit within the Business A or B districts to also be permissible within the Industrial district by special permit. The Building Department has concerns with the proposed use, provided that the subject property has not been used as a landfill in the past. Fire Department – Use would like to see a copy of the Rules & Restrictions for the self-storage units pertaining to what is permissible to store in the units and what is not. Are any buildings to be heated? Fire apparatus access/turning radius within site? Nearest fire hydrant location on/off site? Any vehicle or other motorized storage on site? Councilor Labrie asked if the owner will allow 24/7 access to the storage units? Mr. Kowalski replied yes. He continued that the units will have 24/7 monitoring and he will be notified if there is any suspicious activity. Lee stated that this is the first step for this project. The project will have to go through the Planning Board. Councilor Roy asked how we find out if the property was once a landfill. Lee replied that he believes that there would have to be some record with the DEP and the Building Commissioner, he believes, would be able to determine this during the Building Department review. Councilor Laflamme stated that he has concerns with folks repairing vehicles on this site. Will gasoline be allowed to be stored in the units? Can this special permit be called in at any time for violations? Attorney Garvey stated that he does business with the representatives of this application and cannot answer questions or speak on this matter. Councilor Tillotson stated that any special permit that is in violation of its conditions can be called in. Councilor Walczak asked how long this property has been on the market. It was replied 7 years. Councilor Tillotson asked if the petitioner would be open to Fire Department inspection. Mr. Kowalski replied that he is open to that but is not certain about what the rules are of allowing inspection of people’s personal items. Councilor Tillotson stated that the inspection would be so that all the rules would be followed. The petitioner stated that he would be willing to hear from Attorney Garvey on this matter because it’s a generic question. Attorney Garvey stated that permission would be needed from the storage unit renter to inspect. Councilor Walczak asked that the petitioner supply the Council with a copy of the lease agreement that Mr. Kowalski uses for the storage units. Councilor Krampits asked if the storage units will heated. Mr. Kowalski replied that there will be 2 buildings that will be heated and the rest will be cold storage. The temperature will be controlled by Mr. Kowalski. Motion made by Councilor Roy and second by Councilor Balakier to approve with conditions. 7 CONDITIONS Permit to run with the land SPRAC review approval ITEM #5 Minutes – August 25, 2021 Motion made by Councilor Roy and second by Councilor Balakier to approve. Motion passed. Meeting adjourned at 8:03 PM. 8