Neighbors stormed the Hall of Records to speak out against a new laundromat for Whalley Avenue. They wanted to talk about loitering and litter; the Board of Zoning Appeals wanted to talk about parking, and only parking.
The question of a new laundromat at the Walgreen’s plaza was among the most contentious issues raised during a spirited five-hour meeting of the BZA on Wednesday night.
The BZA deferred voting on the matter until its December meeting, but it heard a lot about it.
The laundromat, comprising 40 washers and 40 dryers, would move into the structure (pictured) between the new Walgreen’s and the Dunkin Donuts at the corner of Whalley and Ella Grasso Boulevard. The plan has drawn heavy fire from local residents and businesspeople who say that it would attract crime and litter and that it runs counter to their efforts to revitalize the area. (See previous Independent coverage here, here, and here.)
The new business would be part of a chain of Precision Wash ‘n’ Dry laundromats in the New Haven area owned by brothers Frank and Louis Sproviero, who were not able to attend Wednesday night’s meeting. Attorney Anthony Avallone and architect Arthur Ratner spoke in their stead.
Attorney Avallone (pictured) spoke first. He said the that since the laundromat is a permitted use of the structure, given the local zoning regulations, the only issue at hand was whether or not there is enough parking for such a use.
“The only issue before you is sufficiency of parking,” Avallone said to the board. He explained repeatedly that he was not looking for any exception to the zoning regulations regarding the use of the building; he was simply fulfilling his obligation to show that there was enough parking spots to support a laundromat.
The regulations require one parking space per 200 square feet of retail space, Avallone said. The laundromat structure is 3,900 square feet altogether. Excluding office and storage spaces, it comes in at just under 2,400 square feet, which would require 12 spots. There are 13 spots currently in the site’s lot.
When Board of Zoning Appeals Chair Cathy Weber asked to hear from those opposed to the proposition, the back of the room erupted in green signs that read simply, “No Laundromat.” Altogether, 25 people raised their hands to signal their disapproval, and many of them stepped up to the mic to speak out.
Edgewood patroller and neighborhood organizer Eliezer Greer presented photographic evidence, the findings of his visits to other Precision Wash ‘n’ Dry laundromats in the area. Pointing out burned out lightbulbs in light-up signs, litter-strewn parking lots, and graffiti on walls, Greer made the argument that the proprietors do not care for their properties. He said that their laundromats have been the subject of an inordinate number of 911 calls.
BZA chair Cathy Weber reminded Greer and others that comments to the board must pertain to the issue of parking.
Kenny Chan, owner of the K‑C Laundromat, just a few blocks from the site of the proposed new laundromat, stood up to say that there was no way for his little 1,000 square foot facility to compete with the new one.
“Parking!” interrupted Weber. Chan responded he had nothing to say about parking.
Attorney Bill Gallagher (pictured), representing the Edgewood Neighborhood Association, pointed to two photographs of a full parking lot in front of the laundromat site. “This is just a random photo of the parking lot” he said, saying that the 11 a.m. photos showed that there were no parking spots available now with no business even open at the site.
Avalone took the mic a second time to make the same argument: there is enough parking according to the city’s formula. “The formula then is the formula now. It hasn’t changed. The fact that people don’t like the laundromat is not the issue.”
Speaking out of turn, Gallagher asked architect Ratner (pictured) if the parking lot plans that they kept pointing represented the final design of the Walgreens plaza as built. Ratner quickly said no, before Weber quashed the side conversation.
After the meeting, Greer seized on the exchange as evidence of untrustworthiness on the part of the laundromat. He said that the use of an inaccurate map was “very questionable,” and that the quick question and answer between Gallagher and Ratner had “clearly raised eyebrows” among the members of the board.
Greer was also skeptical about the plans shown for the laundromat itself, suggesting that they had been designed with an excess of “office space” in order to reduce the number of parking spaces legally required. “None of the other laundromats had office spaces,” he said.
“The neighborhood has consensus,” Greer continued. “They do not want this.”
“There are so many reasons not to do it.” Greer said. “Just on parking, there is ground to stop this laundromat.”
Greer said that the neighborhood would rather see a shoe store, or a florist, or a high-end clothing shop in the location. Among the stores they do not want: fast food outlets, pharmacies, and laundromats.