Fred Valenti, owner of Watertown-based Valenti Auto Group on Straits Turnpike, reported that he will challenge the recent denial by the Planning & Zoning Commission of an application to reform a vacant building at 694 Straits Turnpike into a showroom for Saab vehicles. Valenti Auto Group employs 100 people, with the Saab division comprising approximately 14 percent of the business. Valenti has been looking to move the Saab showroom since December, after General Motors filed for bankruptcy. Mr. Valenti stated that the Swedish company that purchased Saab will not renew the dealership until it has a separate location. This was stated by Attorney Curtis Titus, who was retained by Mr. Valenti on July 1.
"Saab moved into other hands and they will not renew the dealership unless Saab is set up in a separate location apart from other automobile shares," said Atty. Titus.
Mr. Valenti has taken issue with the P&Z decision, since he says the denial was on the basis of concerns that were not brought up during the public hearing stage.
During the public hearing, applicants are allowed to respond to concerns of commission members and amend their designs and plans accordingly to fit regulations. After it is closed, the opportunity to do this is no longer available.
During the public hearing on July 1 on the car dealership's application, as provided in the minutes, P&Z Commission members discussed various items such as signage, impervious surface requirements, lighting and sidewalks, before the public hearing was voted to be continued on July 15.
During the July 15 public hearing, discussion was brief, as Atty. Titus reviewed new design aspects. The only discussion on the part of P&Z Commission members came from Glen Duplissie, who had asked about the distance between existing street pavement and pavement on the property. As stated in the minutes, Mr. Duplissie noted that the Zoning Board of Appeals had approved the distance of five feet from the property line.
Following Mr. Duplissie's comments, the public hearing was closed. During the regular meeting that occurred later in the evening on July 15, the application was tabled.
On August 5, the commission voted to deny the application. Reasoning, as provided in the minutes, was: The lot size is .6875 acres and Section 33.5.1 requires five acres minimum; six ten-foot maple trees are proposed to be removed and removal of the trees is not in conformance with section 51.12; the site plan does not conform to section 51.10.3 by providing safe and convenient access to structures, uses, parking spaces and loading spaces; the site plan does not provide safe pedestrian movement within and adjacent to the site.
The final reason for the denial is that "there is no dumpster on the site plan."
In a statement to the Town Times on Tuesday, August, 18, Mr. Valenti stated, "the Commission denied the application for what would appear to be minor issues that were not raised by the Commission members during the public hearing. Had these concerns been mentioned during the public hearing, we could have addressed them."
In reference to the denial on the basis of a lack of a dumpster on the site plans, Mr. Valenti stated, "for instance, we stated we don't need a large commercial dumpster because this is a relatively small operation."
"We would like to resolve it," said Mr. Valenti. "I'm not sure what we are going to do. My attorney is going to decide the best way and we are going to talk to the town."
"We just wanted to turn it into a show room," he added.
Mr. Valenti would not comment if this would turn into a lawsuit against the P&Z Commission or any other legal intent, but reiterated it is in the hands of his attorney. "We're hoping that we can get this resolved and I'm not sure what the mechanisms are to do that."
However, Mr. Valenti theorized that since he had sought a variance from Zoning Board of Appeals, and that it was granted, P&Z Commission members had been upset.
"I found this whole experience to be quite frustrating," said Mr. Valenti.
"When the Commission asked me to retain an attorney and an engineer, we did. When the Commission previously requested information or had a question, we provided a response. It appeared that the Commission was making this matter as difficult as possible and I don't know why."
Mr. Valenti added, "We're going to do what we can to protect the business and the jobs."