KENT, Conn.—Motoriot, a custom-car dealership at 21 Bridge St., came back before the Planning and Zoning Commission Thursday night with two items on the agenda.
At the Jan. 8 meeting, owners Charles Narwold and Jason Doornick asked for a continuance of their application for a modified site plan and further introduced an application to conduct educational classes at their location.
The site has currently been cited for violations because the owners have not complied with either the first or second site plans approved by the PZC. In December, the PZC gave the owners a punch list of things they had to complete to get approval for their latest modification and the partners said they would return in January for final approval.
Thursday they said they needed more time.
The plan submitted in December included an exterior stairwell to provide a secondary egress from a second-floor apartment. Because the stairwell will encroach on the side yard setback, the pair needed to obtain a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals before the PZC could approve the plan.
The ZBA could grant a variance if it finds there is a hardship, but hardships are usually considered to be material problems with a site that make compliance impossible or would do more damage than good.
In December, Fire Marshal Tim Limbos said the staircase is an alternate solution to comply with the fire code. Otherwise, a sprinkler system would have to be installed, which would be a financial hardship for the business.
The ZBA cancelled its December meeting “due to lack of business.”
Without having obtained approval for the site plan, the violation citation remains in place. Still, the partners introduced a new application to conduct educational classes in “general mechanics” at the site.
“This application is interesting to consider in the future,” Chairman Karen Casey said, “but the zoning regulations require that any existing violation be solved first. I am not sure we can go any further with this.”
“Is that a federal law or local zoning law?” asked Doornick, demanding to know which regulation called for violations to be resolved before a new application can be submitted.
Zoning Enforcement Officer Tai Kern supplied the requested regulation.
Casey chided Doornick for the number of times the partners have come before the zoning board with applications that are incomplete or that do not comply with regulations. “This is really getting old,” she said.
The Planning and Zoning Commission has dealt with the business more than 22 times since March 2024.
Doornick, who attended Thursday’s meeting, took umbrage at Casey’s remark.
“We’re solution-oriented,” he insisted, “and saying this is old is not going to help get things moved along quicker. We’re moving at a pace that matches the town’s pace as well. We’re educating ourselves with very little information to help. … We have come to understand that that responsibility and burden is not shared by the town but on the individuals seeking to make decisions for their businesses. The responsibility and burden is difficult to manage because the hand-holding process that I thought we would receive… is not as great as can be it, Ms. Casey. It’s been very difficult working with the town.”
Doornick asserted that other businesses, such as High Watch, “struggle to understand the code,” adding that a “lot is open to interpretation” and that there is a “hidden language” that applicants have to learn.
Casey countered by noting that Kern has “done a tremendous amount of work and hand-holding on this. I don’t know what you would have done without her.”
Doornick said he appreciated the efforts of the ZEO, but that working with Town Hall was “a town-wide issue.”
Doornick was given the choice of withdrawing the new application until other issues are cleared up or having it tabled until the next meeting. Doornick expressed some urgency in presenting it because he is negotiating with two private schools and wants to be able to give them a timetable.
Kern told them that every application has a timetable within which the PZC must act. Usually hearings are scheduled the month after an application is first presented if the PZC decides it is significant. Closing a hearing then sets a clock ticking for the PZC to make a decision, usually within a month or two.
“If you clean up the previous violations next month, then we can roll into this one,” Kern said. “You are adding two parking spaces [for the apartment] that have to be reviewed; you need striping and lines for all the parking spaces and signage. All that has to be completed to get a certificate of zoning compliance. If it’s done for the next meeting, we could move on to this [new application].”
Casey concluded, “I think this thing is a terrific idea, but you have to go through proper procedures.”
