Middlebury Residents Oppose Pomeroy Enterprises Development

At least two Middlebury residents echoed the same sentiment at a Thursday, Dec. 1, Planning and Zoning meeting.

They are not opposed to Pomeroy Enterprises' application on a site plan for an office and retail development at 472 Middlebury Rd.

Instead, it is a proposed entrance and exit into the parking area that has residents of Clear View Knoll concerned.

The property is just over half an acre in size and has frontage on Middlebury Road, also known as Route 64, and on Clear View Knoll.

Potential Access Via Clear View Knoll

Judy DeSocio, a Clear View Knoll resident, said that in recordings on prior meetings about the project, Pomeroy Enterprises Manager Robert "Bob" LaFlamme specifically said he did not want to create an entrance or exit onto Clear View Knoll, saying he wanted to be a good neighbor.

LaFlamme replied that originally, he did not want to enter and exit onto the side street. But after a while, it became apparent to him that the other option was to build a retaining wall that he said residents will not find attractive.

"The wall won't look good," he said. " I want to be a good neighbor but I don't think you would be happy with that wall going in."

DeSocio said she prefers the wall over increased traffic on Clear View Knoll.

Site Plan Details

The site plan is for a two story, 4,800-square foot building. Each floor will consist of 2,400-square feet, if the application is approved.

Twelve parking spaces are proposed for the upper and lower parking area each, for a total of 24 spaces.

Brendan Browne of Clear View Knoll said his concern is on the size and scope of the application.

"Even the most attractive building, when in the wrong spot and oversized, is ugly," said Browne.

He spoke in favor of connecting the upper and lower parking lots so drivers do not get stuck in the lots when they are full.

If the lots are connected, that may avoid an incident where a car comes into a lot with no available spaces, then has to awkwardly turn around, drive back on Route 64 and then come back to the lot again to see if a spot opened up, he said.

Planning and Zoning Commissioner Matt Robison asked the applicant if he will consider connecting the two lots. Attorney Jim Strub, on behalf of Pomeroy Enterprises, said that was considered.

"Every time I've seen something like that done, it doesn't work," said LaFlamme.

Browne also expressed concern about the proposed stairs connecting the two lots. He said people may not want to park in the upper lot if they are conducting business in the lower lot, causing them to wait for a spot and back up traffic.

"This is America," said Browne. "People don't like stairs."

Construction of a Sidewalk

Commissioners mentioned construction of a sidewalk in front of the lot. Strub said there are no other sidewalks on that side of the road and any sidewalk constructed in front of the lot will not connect to another sidewalk at this time.

"It is not something we feel is practical for the location at this time," he said.

LaFlamme said he understands the commission's desire to get a sidewalk started.

"If the board feels it's necessary, I'd probably do it, but it's a sidewalk to nowhere," he said.

A Prior Variance Questioned

At the Thursday, Nov. 3, meeting, Town Counsel Stephen Savarese suggested the recordings of the Zoning Board of Appeals meetings be reviewed in order to verify how a variance was actually granted, as there were some questions on the variance.

According to the November 3 meeting minutes, Greg Bush of Clear View Knoll stated that ZBA member Jack Baker attached a condition to the setback variance requiring traffic to be let out onto Route 64 as opposed to Clear View Knoll.

Strub stated that a variance had been granted from ZBA that was specific only to the setback from Route 64, according to the November 3 meeting minutes.

But according to Browne, that above mentioned condition by Baker somehow got lost in the shuffle.

Browne was a ZBA member but said he resigned from his position on the board in order to speak about Clear View Knoll at the December 1 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.

"I regret having to resign from that board," he said. "I felt it was important for the people of Clear View Knoll and what traffic level could form [if the site plan is approved], for me to do that."

Browne said the intent of the ZBA at the time was to protect the Clear View Knoll residents from the potential of increased traffic via an entrance and exit onto the street.

"Jack Baker thought his action protected the people of Clear View Knoll ... Because of a processing error in the filing of a proper motion, the Clear View Knoll residents are suffering," said Browne.

Planning and Zoning Chairman Curtis Bosco said the reality is that the motion that was filed and the minutes from that ZBA meeting are the information the commission has to use when making its decision.

Commissioners closed the public hearing but did not take action. A public hearing on a grading and excavation permit on the site was scheduled for 7:30 p.m. Thursday, Jan. 5, 2012, at Shepardson Community Center, 1172 Whittemore Rd.

Follow Woodbury-Middlebury Patch on Facebook and Twitter.