Thomas MacMillan Photo
Three months after city zoners allowed a new downtown supermarket to sell beer within 130 feet of a package store, they denied a Fair Haven bodega the same permission — because there’s a liquor store 1,040 feet away.
In a split vote earlier this week, the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) denied a zoning permission application from Waldo Tejada (pictured), the 37-year-old owner of La Placita Meat Market on Lombard Street in Fair Haven.
Tejada had asked for permission to sell beer at his corner grocery store, which is less than the regulatory minimum 1,500 feet from two liquor stores.
The decision follows a September BZA vote that granted beer-selling permission to Elm City Market, the new food co-op at the 360 State apartment tower downtown, which is within 1,500 feet of both the Wine Thief and College Wine. In that case, zoners gave their approval over the objections of the owner of a beer-selling convenience store directly across the street from the co-op.
It was a different story on Tuesday night, when the board sided with the owners of two liquor stores who showed up to object to Tejada’s application.
Quinones and Tejada.
Tejada, who’s from the Dominican Republic, made his case to the board with the help of a translator, Miguel Quinones. He said he’s been in business for six months, selling meat and produce. Customers have been asking him to sell beer, Tejada said. With the economy the way it is, he’d like to be able to offer another product the neighborhood wants, he said.
Thomas Talbot, deputy director of zoning, informed the board that two liquor stores are within a 1,500-foot radius of La Placita.
Guy’s Package is a block away. Baker’s Package is nearby on Ferry Street. The latter is about 1,100 feet away as the crow flies, but in walking distance it’s over 1,500 feet.
“It’s a hardship for some customers to walk 1,500 feet,” Quinones said. “Especially with inclement weather.”
“I have a little bit of an issue buying my beer,” said Jason Felipe, who lives at 461 Lombard St. He said he has to walk a long way to pick up brews, and doesn’t own a car. A few months ago, he was walking to buy beer and someone started chasing him, he said.
Ernie Santiago, the local alderman, said he lives almost directly across from La Placita. Tejada runs a good business and keeps the place clean, he said.
“My liquor store will suffer,” said Girish Parikh (pictured), the proprietor of Baker’s package store. People shouldn’t necessarily expect to have access to beer wherever it’s convenient for them, Parikh said. “They don’t need to have liquor or beer right in front of their house.”
Rajesh Saraiya, the owner of Guy’s, expressed similar concerns.
Quinones pointed out that the Baker’s and Guy’s are within 1,500 feet of each other. They must have received special zoning permission at some point, so why not La Placita? he asked.
“Approval of this will have a dozen people in our office within the next week,” warned Talbot. Every corner store in the city is going to want permission to sell beer, he said.
Later, when it came time for voting on the matter, board member Victor Fasano (pictured) said the city should have different zoning regulations for package stores — which can sell wine and liquor — and grocery stores — which can only sell beer. Tejada now faces a hardship because the law treats grocery and package stores the same, “even though they’re completely different,” Fasano said.
“I’m in favor of this one, just as the board approved Elm City Market,” he said. “It’s the same situation.”
“He’s serving the neighborhood well,” Fasano said. “Why shouldn’t he be allowed to sell them beer?”
“The only hardship I heard was financial,” said board member Ben Trachten. That’s not a valid hardship under the law, he said. It’s not like 360 State, he said.
The hardship at Elm City Market was self-created, responded Fasano. The store was built within 1,500 feet of existing liquor stores.
But the downtown neighborhood is very different; it’s much denser, Trachten responded.
“The one major factor here is that Yale is not behind this, that’s the difference,” Fasano said.
“Nobody forced him to buy that property,” Trachten said of Tejada.
“I don’t see why he should be punished” because another store is 1,000 feet away, Fasano said.
“That’s the regulation,” Trachten said.
But the board just gave permission to a store with pre-existing alcohol sales only 130 feet away, Fasano said. “You can’t get away from that.”
“Let him make some money,” Fasano said of Tejada. No one from the neighborhood showed up to complain about the proposal, “except potential competitors,” he observed.
Board member Regina Winters agreed with Fasano that the board gave permission to Elm City Market in a similar situation. But “there are thousands of bodegas and corner stores” in the city who will all want to sell beer if the board lets La Placita do so. “I don’t think we can grant it.”
Winters ended up abstaining on the vote. “I can’t decide,” she said.
Fasano voted to approve the application, along with board Chair Pat King. Trachten and board Secretary Gaylord Bourne voted to deny. Since the application needed four affirmative votes to pass, it failed.
On Thursday morning in La Placita, Tejada was stocking his produce case. Shelves nearby held Fruity Dyno Bits breakfast cereal, pickled serrano peppers, canned sugarcane, and fresh yucca and plantains — and no beer.
Tejada said he just wanted to sell everyday beer: Bud Light, Corona. “Business is slow. There’s no money,” he said. “There’s a lot of people here. They don’t have cars.”
Tejada said he can’t understand why the board voted against his application, and plans to appeal the decision.
What would be wrong with a grocery store selling beer?
They do so in NYC without apparent issues. Heck, some grocery stores I've been to outside of CT even sell wine. Oddly, those states don't have higher rates of alcohol related problems.
Fasano and King got this one right. I'm glad to see some difference of opinion on the board after my own experience of being specifically instructed in how to vote on any major application.
Trachten is correct that the hardship is self-imposed, but Fasano is also correct that the hardship is self-imposed on Elm Market and the many other stores selling beer in New Haven.
Fasano is doubly correct in that the prohibition is meaningless, arbitrary, and unfair.
I believe he made a responsible decision in voting to allow, because he understands that no court would uphold the decision to deny. Why send every applicant to court to get the right they should have--and will have? It creates an atmosphere where local government is slowing progress and hurting small businesses.