.
Feedback

South Windsor Commission Removes Size Restriction on Grocery Stores in Gateway Zone

Supermarkets were limited to just 22,000 square feet before the provision was removed from the books Tuesday evening.

The South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission Tuesday evening narrowly approved removing a cap on the size of grocery stores in the Gateway Zone.

The Gateway Zone, which includes The Promenade Shops at Evergreen Walk, had a restriction that no grocery store could exceed 22,000 square feet.

During a public hearing on the matter, Town Manager Matthew Galligan, who requested the zone change to enhance the town’s ability to recruit businesses to the area, said that the initial restriction may have been in place to protect Highland Park Market when it was a tenant in town several years ago.


Highland Park Market was about 22,000 square feet, according to Galligan. Now that the business is no longer in South Windsor, Galligan said that it made sense to lift the restriction to enable him and town staff to recruit other grocery stores or allow current stores in South Windsor to expand into the Gateway Zone.

To give the commission a better sense of how large grocery stores are, Galligan said that Stop & Shop on Ellington Road is about 64,000 square feet, while Geissler’s is 26,600 square feet. Target and Lowe's, by comparison, are 122,000 and 150,000 square feet, respectively.

Galligan also noted that Gateway Zone was the only zone that had such an “irregularity.”

“Twenty-two thousand square feet is not great for a market,” Galligan said.

But two residents - Gary Bazzano and Cindy Beaulieu - spoke out against lifting the restriction entirely.

During their comments to the commission, Bazzano and Beaulieu each said that they favored putting a cap on how large a grocery store could be.

The concern, Beaulieu said, is that a big-box store, like Wal-Mart, which sells groceries, could come in without a cap on store size.

“That’s not the type of thing we want lining Buckland Road,” said Beaulieu, who suggested placing a cap of perhaps 50,000 or 60,000 square feet on grocery stores in the Gateway Zone.

But Galligan said that he did not favor putting a cap on grocery store sizes for two reasons. First, there were other zoning regulations - such as how buildings have to look - that ensure that the right type of businesses open their doors in the Gateway Zone. In addition, Galligan said that any caps would hamper his ability to recruit stores like Whole Foods, if they choose to look at South Windsor. Galligan also said that stores may also want to expand, and the cap could prove to be an unwanted stumbling block.

Galligan also dispelled the notion that Wal-Mart would be interested in opening in South Windsor.

“This is not their market,” Galligan said. “Wal-Mart is not coming to South Windsor.”

The commission ultimately removed the restriction without a cap by a 4-3 vote.

Commissioner Bart Pacekonis voted against removing the restriction.

“The Gateway Zone is our special zone in South Windsor,” he said. “If you remove caps … it becomes like other areas in town.”

Pacekonis said that he was concerned that, because supermarkets generate more traffic, that there should be a cap of about 50,000 square feet in the Gateway Zone.

William Carroll Jr. and Elizabeth Kuehnel also voted against lifting the measure without a cap.

But Chairman Patrick Kennedy, who voted with the majority, said that the best way to ensure that a grocery store is the right fit is through the design regulations.

Lavina Wilson, Mario Marrero and William Butter joined Kennedy in voting to remove the restriction altogether.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from South Windsor Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Kevin McCann:  Don't we deserve better?
Hank Cullinane May 23, 2013 at 04:09 pm
entrenched politician, Nixonian strategy, Petulant bait and switch, profligate spending, OrwellianRead More "new approach", but don't worry Kevin it is just a perceived persecutor.
Kevin McCann May 23, 2013 at 03:17 pm
Mike, thanks for using your real name, and for trying to have a repsectful discourse. I wish moreRead More would do so. I disagree with you, but we can agree to disagree. I do not berate people's ideas, and I have never threatened anyone. My only criticism has been of the tactic of taking pot shots from the dark. I believe that "Steve Phillips" is an elected official, which makes his rants that much more objectionable by using a pseudonym. I don't mind criticism. What I do mind is shadowy mud slinging that makes it so difficult for either party to recruit good people to run for office. There are a lot of good people who see the gratuitous insults and maligning, and say that they do not want to subject themselves to that nonsense. Using real names raises the level of discourse and allows for a real exchange of ideas.
Michael Sullivan May 23, 2013 at 01:01 pm
More red-herring here! First Mr. McCann and now Mr. Riley... Really, gentlemen? You do yourselvesRead More a disservice. How can you expect to be taken seriously as town leaders if you would continue to persist in berating folks on public blogs about their user names?!? It is undignified. Quite plainly you are bullying here – I question your judgment.
"Visionaries" of South Windsor lead by McCann and Daugherty hard at work...
Steve Phillips May 18, 2013 at 08:55 am
Mr. McCann arrogantly conducts himself on the Town Council and here as if he is above criticism,Read More forgetting (or simply not caring) about the privilege and responsibility serving elected office holds. A privilege and responsibility granted by the very same constituents McCann insults with comments above. Lacking empathy and humility are never traits respected leaders aspire, and sadly what McCann has disrespectfully expressed here.
Susan May 17, 2013 at 06:18 pm
Totally agree with you Mr. Sullivan. There are some who cannot use their real name or only a firstRead More name at fear of being attacked. Being a politician Mr. McCann has no problem speaking out. If you disagree with him you get ripped apart. I have witnessed it first hand by watching the council meetings on TV.
Michael Sullivan May 17, 2013 at 04:00 pm
Some folks choose not to use their real or full names on public bulletin boards and blogs…Read More Welcome to the 21st century Mr. McCann! Indeed the terms of use for Patch say quite clearly: "We encourage, but do not require, that the user name you provide be your real name." Mr. McCann you have chosen to be a public figure and politician. Others who may only wish to participate anonymously on blogs and postings such as these are not required to participate at whatever _you_ may deem to be an acceptable level.