THESE MINUTES ARE PRESENTED IN DRAFT FORM AND HAVE NOT BEEN FORMALLY APPROVED BY THE ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OFFICIAL COPIES OF MINUTES, WHEN APPROVED, CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE TOWN CLERK OR PLANNING OFFICE.

ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION

MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING

JULY 12, 2007

A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Thursday, July 12, 2007, in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman DiPace called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.

PRESENT: Anthony DiPace, Chairman

Elizabeth Ballard

Jeffrey Cooper

Charles Duren

James Hickey, Jr.

Karen Weseliza

Kathleen Sarno. Alternate

Charles Ladd, Alternate

ALSO PRESENT: Jose Giner, Director of Planning

MINUTES

Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ballard, to approve the Minutes of June 21, 2007. Two corrections were made on page fourteen. “Internally” should read “externally” in the first sentence and in paragraph three “Chairman DiPace” should be changed to “Commissioner Duren.” The Minutes, as amended, were approved by a 6 – 0 – 1 vote. Commissioner Sarno abstained.

STAFF COMMENTS

a. Town Attorney (in person)

Assistant Town Attorney Mark Cerrato reported for 229 Post Office Road there is a trial date set for July 25, 2007. On the Somerset development, they have submitted the record for that.

b. Zoning Enforcement Officer

Commissioner Duren asked what a mobility device is under Item 4 of the Zoning Enforcement Officer’s report. Mr. Giner will check on this and report back.

Chairman DiPace stated he received a complaint regarding 14 Brewster Road where someone is running a lawnmower repair shop. Mr. Bickley had cited this business last year for the same thing. Chairman DiPace requested a status of this for the next meeting.

c. Director of Planning

Mr. Giner stated he had a request from Mrs. Connelly who recently purchased the property across from Asnuntuck College, the Starr plumbing building. This is a residential zone and the residing requested can be done. However, she wants to take the roof line and raise it to make it look better. The roof is presently flat. Raising the roof would not add any more floor space. She would like to keep the vinyl siding and do some brick work. The last approved use was a beauty salon and an office. Mrs. Connelly appeared before the Commission and stated she wanted to put a roof over the top and add stone to the front to make the building look better.

Commissioner Cooper made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Duren, to allow the Director of Planning to handle administratively the renovations to Mrs. Connelly’s building across from Asnuntuck College. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting.

Mr. Giner reported on an issue with the one stop convenience store next to the Dairy Queen. They installed a walk in window without any permits from Zoning or from the Building Department. North Central Health officials, Mr. Bickley and Mr. Giner visited the building this morning and told them to remove the window or apply for the necessary permit. They did come in this afternoon and take out some application forms. They will be on the agenda in September.

Mr. Giner stated he received a copy of a letter from Mr. Juan Barkus who resides at 5 Yale Court. There were two rear lots approved for Yale Court. There is a street light that was shown on the plans as being at the end of that. The people who bought the homes would prefer not to have the street light. Mr. Barkus has installed a colonial lamp at the end of his driveway and stated it is more than enough for him. Mr. Giner has one letter and he has asked for a letter from the other homeowner. Following some discussion, the consensus of the Commission was that the Yale Court homeowners follow the approved plan which includes a street light. Mr. Giner will tell the homeowners to reapply to the Commission for any change.

Mr. Giner stated when the Commission approved College Pizza, there was an extra room on the side. They have requested to close off that room and perhaps have it for another tenant at some point. They have a door from the outside in. This is something the Building Department brought to Mr. Giner’s attention. Mr. Giner stated the way the building is set up, there is a common bathroom in the back and there are two doors coming in. Mr. Giner showed the layout on a drawing. Chairman DiPace asked that the Commission see the plans prior to any approval.

Mr. Giner noted Commissioner Ladd had asked about the North Maple Street home that is in poor condition. Mr. Bickley went out and spoke to the owner who said he was going to clean up the site. Mr. Bickley will be monitoring the site. Commissioner Ladd felt the owner should be given a deadline.

Mr. Giner talked to Mr. Bickley about the noise coming from Shaker Road. Mr. Bickley said the police department has four officers assigned to this and Mr. Giner sent a copy of the Minutes to the Chief. They will look into it.

Commissioner Duren had a complaint from homeowners in the Shaker Heights area about the noise from trucks. They aren’t sure but think it may be Martin Brower. The noise occurred at 11:00 p.m. Mr. Giner stated there are no restrictions in the industrial zones. Mr. Giner can ask the police if that type of noise falls within the noise ordinance. Commissioner Duren suggested Mr. Giner send something to the police department regarding the backup truck beeps which can be heard late in the evening. Residents in the audience stated these noises can be heard at 3:00 a.m. Chairman DiPace asked that Mr. Giner forward this complaint on to the police department.

Commissioner Ladd brought up 118 Raffia Road. He would like to have staff go through the history on that construction yard on Raffia Road. Chairman DiPace stated he was told that when they came in for the subdivision to build the houses that are around this yard, that the construction company was only going to be temporary until the homes were built. Mr. Giner could not confirm this from the minutes. Commissioner Ladd noted there are three businesses at this location and the gentleman is selling trucks, doing landscaping and has a construction yard. Chairman DiPace suggested Mr. Giner review some old aerials regarding this use. Mr. Giner will ask the Motor Vehicles Department if there is a seller’s license at this location. Chairman DiPace stated if the business is exporting them, a license is not needed. Mr. Giner stated the neighbors have said they were exporting old construction equipment overseas. Mr. Giner will piece together the history for the Commission.

Commissioner Ladd brought up 33 North Maple Street. He did not feel that having a junk yard in the middle of a village area was appropriate. Mr. Giner stated Mr. Bickley has met with the owner. Chairman DiPace asked if there is a time limit on building permits. The wood has been sitting there for about three years but no improvements have been made. Mr. Giner will find out the status of this building permit.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

James Breslin, Oakwood Street, brought up boulevards which he thinks is a great idea from both a protection perspective and also from the perspective of being able to create, maintain and preserve value in a neighborhood. What he has seen is the presence of these types of boulevards add significantly to property value.

Mr. Breslin addressed the housing situation that people his age face. The average house in this town sells for $230,000 and because you shouldn’t buy a house worth more than three times your pay, in order to buy a house in this town, you should be making $80,000 per year. Most people his age are not going to leave college with a degree and an $80,000 job offer. Mr. Breslin’s concern is about the kind of construction he sees in town and that continues to go on. Much of the new residential construction is age restricted housing. This is a concern to him because it does nothing for his age group. Chairman DiPace stated over 55 housing is already set for a public hearing and he postponed any discussion until that hearing on July 26, 2007.

Mr. Breslin noted there is an urgent necessity for housing that would be helpful to people his age. The place to put it is not in the rural parts of town but to put it near the highway and near Thompsonville in an area where you can have vibrancy. He felt the inability to buy such property is a threat to the state economy. The bottom line is if you don’t have housing for new workers, you aren’t going to bring them into the work force. They will enter the work force elsewhere.

Mr. Breslin urged the Commission to take a look at the kind of housing that we don’t have much of in this town which is townhouses. It would attract people in his generation and help them to become homeowners.

Reg Leonard, 42 Fairfield Road, had some questions. One has been answered with the public hearing scheduled for July 26, 2007 on fifty-five and over housing. His second question is the attorney that was here said something about the suit for Somerset Homes. Mr. Leonard asked about the status of that. Mr. Giner stated 229 Post Road is going to trial on July 25, 2007. There is no update on the other suit. Mr. Leonard received a call today from Laurie Parker who lives over by the lake. His concern is that applicant is coming before the Inland Wetlands Commission with a new application. The Commission denied this application in the past. The applicant came with the intention of trying to modify his permit for the wetlands issue. Mr. Leonard felt he would have to follow the rule of a new application before Inland Wetlands and then come before this Commission again. The developer thought he was just going to get a modification. Mr. Leonard asked if this Commission’s ruling of denying this applicant his particular project makes it necessary for him to go back to Inland Wetlands and submit all his changes again and then come back to this Commission. Mr. Giner stated there is an application pending before Inland Wetlands. There would be another public hearing but a planning and zoning application has not yet been received.

Thomas Tyler, 18 Bridge Lane with law offices at 92 High Street with Tyler & Tyler, stated the purpose of his appearing tonight is to express deep concerns regarding the competency, integrity and professionalism of the Planning Department. This is not a reflection on the Planning and Zoning Commission nor is it a reflection on the women that work in the Planning Department or Wayne Bickley. There have been so many incidents that have personally affected his wife, his father-in-law and himself over the last few years that it’s very difficult to believe that they are all circumstantial, particularly with regard to Post Office Road and Mullen Road - Mullen Road back in 2001 and Post Office Road most recently where the Commission will recall in 1998 it was approved by Wetlands and approved also by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Then there was some kind of a mix-up in the Planning Department where they lost the mylar for a while. Then when they found the mylar but they didn’t tell anyone about it. They then eventually destroyed the mylar without telling anyone about it other than perhaps Town Counsel. Subsequently, when they learned what had transpired, their approvals had all expired. Mr. Tyler noted they were here last year and the Commission was very generous in its consideration and reapproved their application and, in fact, gave back their application fee because it was not the fault of him, his wife or his father-in-law who is a conserved person. At that same time, prior to their approval from Planning and Zoning, they had gone to the Inland Wetlands Commission and also received an approval. That approval, they thought, was a full approval. Subsequently, they came before the Commission to get the subdivision approval.

Attorney Tyler stated now, some time later, they are faced with the allegation that a specific condition was put on their application which he doesn’t believe has ever been on any other approval in the Town of Enfield before them or after them. It is called Condition 19 for Wetlands. Along with the normal conditions that you see, if you get a wetlands approval and you’re going to make changes that may adversely or substantially affect wetlands, it says you have to go back to Wetlands. They have that condition in their approval and they are not complaining about that. Attorney Tyler stated they also slid in a condition that said “a new and separate Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Permit will be sought for the development of each individual parcel.” Attorney Tyler stated there is a saying in the law that the law abhors absurdity. The approval that they gave to them is really a non-approval because after they go to Planning and Zoning, then they have to go back all over again to Wetlands and if they decide to change things, now what do they do? Do they have to go back to Planning and Zoning again? It creates an absurdity in the law. Faced with that, Attorney Tyler sent a letter to Chris Bromson as the Town Attorney on June 20, 2007. Attorney Tyler presented four items to the Commission for their information.

Attorney Tyler stated his letter to Attorney Bromson concerns the Inland Wetlands application No. 465 for the seven-lot subdivision on Post Office Road. As the Commission can see, Attorney Tyler is telling Mr. Bromson that he believes that one or more of the approval conditions are illegal or unenforceable. What brought it to a head was J & L Builders who was going to build some houses there went before the Inland Wetlands Commission on lots 4 and 5 which both front on Post Office Road. A determination was made that they had to go through the whole process again. Attorney Tyler asked Attorney Bromson for a legal opinion. Attorney Bromson, because there is a conflict in that office, has shipped anything of theirs to other counsel. Attorney Tyler’s letter was sent to the Town Attorney with a copy to his wife and a copy to J & L Builders. In the upper left hand corner, there is a note which says “Steve, please comment. Thanks. Maria.” Attorney Tyler noted the Enfield Town Attorney decided to bring it upstairs and give it to Mr. Sadlowski for whatever purposes to get a comment. Attorney Tyler stated page 2 is the comment that Mr. Sadlowski gave directly to the Assistant Town Attorney, Maria Stavropolous, and in it he explains that although he wasn’t here, he believes the condition was placed because the plans in 2006 were very vague and inadequate. He further represents that the old plans were from the original approval back in the eighties and they had a 25’ instead of a 100’ buffer indicated and didn’t show footing drains and didn’t have details expected today. Attorney Tyler stated those are material misrepresentations made by Mr. Sadlowski. The approval was in 1998 and again in 2006. Attorney Tyler did bring the map from the town hall that is recorded after all the approvals to show the Commission so that perhaps they can see for themselves that a 100’ buffer is on the plan. Attorney Tyler showed the map to the Commission and identified the 100’ buffer. When Mr. Sadlowski is saying they only show a 25’ buffer, that is false. The map shows the 100’ buffer clearly marked. Lot 5 doesn’t even include any wetlands. The house and building line were all marked last year and illustrated when they went before Wetlands.

Attorney Tyler stated in the next paragraph, he talks about how the agency had reservations about approval without these details and although it was obvious the lots were buildable, the details were lacking for full review. Attorney Tyler stated this is also false. He then indicates that as a compromise, they approved the subdivision so they can go through the Planning and Zoning Commission. There was no compromise. They approved it but they wanted to further review each lot before it was built. Attorney Tyler stated there definitely was some acrimony because at one of the hearings, the Chair indicated that she had been on the property with a private developer showing it some time earlier. Attorney Tyler called her on that issue in terms of her own personal interests because she had expressed an interest overtly and covertly over the last six years with regard to his wife’s property in terms of trying to get them sold or transferred to someone that she liked. In spite of that, she didn’t have any problem sitting on there through the hearings. They actually had forgotten a lot of what she tried to do to them back in 2001. Otherwise they would have objected at that time to her even participating.

Attorney Tyler stated the next thing the Commission has is a fax to Attorney Eric Knapp from Steven Sadlowski dated June 25, 2007. It recites the same thing over again that he said in his other email to Maria. He goes back and talks about how they should have appealed that decision and whereas many times that is correct but when you can read paragraphs together to give meaning to an approval, you give that meaning rather than come up with an absurd reading. So, again, one condition #18 said we’re going to give you an approval but if you’re going to make a substantial change and do something in the wetlands, then you have to come back. Attorney Tyler stated if you read that together with condition #19, one of them is absurd. If you read them together to make sense of an approval, then #19 is just out the window.

Attorney Tyler stated he then goes on to talk about how the application was approved at a very contentious meeting with the old prints and, again, reasserts that they even had the incorrect upland review area indicated. The Agency included this condition to be able to further review the lots. Attorney Tyler has no clue where he is coming up with this information and he then concludes by saying although there’s no guarantees, that they are going to give a favorable outcome at the next meeting. Attorney Tyler stated this is where he is talking about lots 4 and 5 that J&L Builders LLC had coming up before them. It is a seven lot subdivision so Attorney Tyler doesn’t know where he thinks the other lots are going. Neither of these documents were provided to Attorney Tyler until the fourth page where Attorney Tyler faxed Attorney Bromson. He had had a telephone conversation on July 3 with Attorney Eric Knapp who indicated to him that he had gotten communications from the Enfield Town Attorney’s Office as well as the Wetlands Agent and that’s what he’s relied on in reaching his conclusion. Even if it’s an illegal condition, he believes he would enforce it anyway because that’s what he gets paid to do. He also indicated that selective enforcement is not a problem with him because he‘s discussed it with the Enfield Town Attorney and that is where he would like to go with this. Attorney Tyler stated when you review the file and look at the fax, usually you would want to look at them if you are an attorney coming up with a legal opinion that is supposed to be fair and impartial. You want to look at an application, a plan, a map, the minutes and the rules and you want to apply the facts to the law to come up with a fair interpretation. When Eric Knapp tells Attorney Tyler that he did not look at the file, he had no intention of looking at the file, that he’s been told everything he needs to know from Mr. Sadlowski and the Town Attorney, Attorney Tyler then sent this fax. That’s when he got the two items back yesterday – the email to Maria as well as the fax to Attorney Knapp.

Attorney Tyler stated what he did today was he actually went to the Planning Department to ask Mr. Sadlowski if he didn’t mind, that he had some questions because his recitation of the facts is just not accurate. He then indicated to Attorney Tyler that he had reviewed the files, that he looked at the maps, he looked at the Minutes, he reviewed all the record. Attorney Tyler asked if there was anything else he used for a source because everything he is telling Attorney Tyler is not accurate. Attorney Tyler asked who he got information from. Mr. Sadlowski told him of three people that he talked to – the Town Attorney, Gretchen Pfeifer, who told him what happened last year, and he also talked to Attorney Knapp the day before Attorney Knapp even got into the case but it was the day that Attorney Knapp got the fax from him. Attorney Tyler stated this makes him a little suspicious when a guy sends a fax to a lawyer and he says in the fax, certainly we have the whole file on these applications but I’m unsure if you’ll need them at this point. Attorney Tyler asked Mr. Sadlowski to please go through the file with him and he asked him to look at the map. Attorney Tyler has Mrs. Longhi with him tonight because she was with him today. He has asked her to bring the map that Mr. Sadlowski looked at which is a duplicate original from what the Inland Wetlands people looked at the night they voted. Attorney Tyler is trying to figure out how Mr. Sadlowski comes up with the finding that there’s no 100’ buffer on this thing. Maybe he’s looking at the wrong map. He actually looked at the map that Mrs. Longhi showed the Commission. Attorney Tyler stated Mr. Sadlowski is looking at this map and he’s telling him that the 100’ upland review area is not listed. He kept saying it is 25’ and it is not 100’.

Attorney Tyler asked that Mr. Giner demonstrate whether it is 100’ or not. He noted he was in the office today but Mr. Giner did not want to get involved.

Commissioner Weseliza noted that Mr. Sadlowski did not work here last year for any of these hearings.

Attorney Tyler asked if he said that on that map it is only 25’ instead of the 100’ buffer indicated and if he said also that it’s an incorrect upland review area indicated, that those would be false. Mr. Giner stated the map obviously says it is 100’. Mr. Sadlowski did not say it was 100’. Attorney Tyler stated the other thing that concerns him is after he went through all this with him, he asked if there was anything that he would change. He said no except for his notes on the Inland Wetland Agency because what he made in notes there was that Attorney Tyler represented his wife and the builder going before the Inland Wetlands Agency and he had sent them a letter. Attorney Tyler said neither is true. He had no appearance there. Laurie Longhi and J&L Builders were doing it on their own. That’s why when he found out what was going on, he thought what they were doing was wrong. Attorney Tyler has a concern when you deal with somebody. Mr. Sadlowski either did not review the files or when looking at it, he doesn’t know how to read a map or he refuses to accept reality or he is just following blindly instruction of people who are his sources. In any event, the other concern Attorney Tyler expressed is that this is a dangerous situation. The other problem he had is the first email that Mr. Sadlowski did to the Enfield Town Attorney was not turned over to Attorney Tyler but it was passed on to somebody else. When that happens, that person that passes it on republishes and adopts as true what they are passing on. Attorney Tyler went on to give an example of this. Attorney Tyler stated he has a bone to pick with the Enfield Town Attorney’s Office for doing this and it is a serious concern. When they do things like that and don’t tell him, that bothers him. When he has to go and ferret it out, that bothers him. The other thing that bothers Attorney Tyler is when he spoke with Mr. Sadlowski today, he was less than candid but probably nervous, he was pleasant but certainly not forthright. After he was done answering Attorney Tyler’s questions, Attorney Tyler asked if he could speak with Mr. Giner. Mr. Giner did speak to him. Attorney Tyler asked Mr. Giner if he had participated at all in any of this stuff with Mr. Sadlowski. He said I don’t remember. Attorney Tyler noted he sent an email out to Maria Stavropolous with stuff on it that affects people. Attorney Tyler also told him about the fax. Attorney Tyler asked Mr. Giner to look at that map that he showed the Commission tonight and he said that he doesn’t get involved with Wetlands. Attorney Tyler asked if he is the Director of Planning. Attorney Tyler stated he understands now how the map got lost, how the mylar got shredded, how the tape now is missing and how the fabricating of evidence occurs. Attorney Tyler stated it is intolerable and he thinks this Commission should know and he hopes that something is done with it because it is a dangerous situation in this day and age. Attorney Tyler left the map with the Commission for their information.

Chairman DiPace stated his thoughts go back to an application the Commission had several years ago for the Edge Tattoo Parlor. The Commission approved it with the condition that it come back in a year for re-approval to make sure there have been no problems. When the year was up, the Commission got a legal opinion from Attorney Chris Bromson that said once you approve something, that’s it. There’s no going back and saying you need a re-approval. Chairman DiPace noted now the Commission is seeing a legal opinion that contradicts this previous opinion. Chairman DiPace stated he did hear about this earlier today and he did have a conversation with Mr. Giner. If he finds out that any building permits are not issued for lots that have no wetlands because someone on wetlands or the Wetlands Agent refuses to sign them, he will ask the Town Manager to take appropriate action and do whatever is necessary because it is not acceptable.

Mr. Giner stated he would have a different version of events and certainly any allegations of tapes missing or something the department did are certainly not true. He did speak to Attorney Tyler and the question was did he have any conversations with Mr. Sadlowski about this.

Chairman DiPace asked if the original mylar that was lost was shredded. Mr. Giner stated it was not. Certainly it is not the case what Mr. Tyler is implying. Mr. Giner stated this was approved before Mr. Giner was here and the plans sat around the office for a while. He met with Mr. Mokrycki and he recalls telling him the plans had expired. He doesn’t recall shredding the mylars and if someone else did, he is certainly not aware of it.

Chairman DiPace stated there are too many inconsistencies in the last few months and he will speak to the Town Manager tomorrow and request he find out what is going on.

CORRESPONDENCE

Chairman DiPace reported receipt of the Capitol Region Council of Governments June 27, 2007 report. There is a letter to the Town Engineer regarding Home Depot from Jose Giner dated June 8, 2007 and information from the Town of East Windsor – 11 Rye Street – regarding a Parking Lot Expansion.

Chairman DiPace asked if the Town of Longmeadow has been notified about the project on North Maple Street that abuts the line. Mr. Giner stated he will notify them. Chairman DiPace stated they cleared the area and there is nothing there up to the neighbors’ back yards. They stripped every tree.

Correspondence also includes the Inland Wetlands Notice of Action dated June 19, 2007.

COMMISSIONERS’ CORRESPONDENCE

Commissioners’ Correspondence includes the July, 2007 American Planning Association Planning Magazine. Mr. Giner noted receipt of a letter from Rev. John P. Walzer of the Catholic Charismatic Church regarding property at the corner of Shaker and North Maple Street. Chairman DiPace stated he will recuse himself from this discussion because he lives about eight homes down the street. The letter proposed a church at the corner of Shaker and North Maple Street and using the home as a rectory. The letter requested an indication whether this might be possible according to the zoning ordinance. Chairman DiPace stated this is the home where the gentleman was murdered last winter. Mr. Giner will respond to Rev. Walzer and tell him the requirements. The lot would require a special permit in a residential zone. There are also parking requirements. Commissioner Duren stated Mr. Giner would have to deal with the DOT since it is a state road and they may not want a curb cut at this corner. Vice Chairman Hickey requested that Mr. Giner respond to Rev. Walzer on behalf of the Commission.

Commissioners’ Correspondence also includes some materials from the Connecticut Land Trust along with materials from Commissioner Ladd from the course he attended.

PUBLIC HEARINGS – Continued from June 21, 2007 Meeting

1. SPR#1405 – Application for conversion and re-striping of parking lot off Print Shop Road to accommodate parking of trailers at Lego Campus at 555 Taylor Road, zoned I-1, Map 99, Lot 11, Equity Industrial Enfield LP, Applicant/Owner. (Must close and decide by 7/26/07 Meeting.)

Mark Friend and Hunter Emerson appeared before the Commission regarding this application. They were before the Commission a few weeks ago to present the plan regarding the re-striping of the parking lot for a prospective tenant, Hasbro, for Lego’s former manufacturing facility. Hasbro presently has their operations in East Longmeadow. Mr. Emerson noted some questions came up at the last meeting and they wanted to do some research in order to respond. The one request that was made by the Commission was can Hasbro limit their operations and their movement of trucks not to exceed 9:00 p.m. in the evening. Mr. Emerson stated Hasbro has said no and stated if they were forced to restrict their operations to 9:00 p.m. that this facility would no longer be an economically viable facility for them. Their busiest time is during the months of September, October and November prior to the holiday season.

Chairman DiPace asked if Hasbro proposes to operate twenty-four hours a day. Mr. Emerson stated he has been told they run two eight-hour shifts and they indicated occasionally they might run a third shift if they get a lot of requests from customers for their products.

Mr. Emerson stated another question that was asked was the frequency of truck movement on the site. He is told that as many as sixty trucks will move on the site during the two-shift period which is an average of three to four trucks per hour. With respect to truck traffic from East Longmeadow to this Enfield facility, the movement of product from the manufacturing operation to the distribution center is more predictable and less reactive than from the warehouse to customers. Generally that activity from East Longmeadow to Enfield will be during normal business hours.

Mr. Emerson stated a question was asked about tractors in the complex and there was a concern about the number of tractors and are they going to be idling. This location and this facility is not intended to store tractors. There may be two jockey tractors to move a trailer to and from the loading dock but when trailers come from East Longmeadow, they will come from the trailer and leave and go back to East Longmeadow or they will come from East Longmeadow, pick up loaded trucks and leave. Commissioner Duren asked if the jockey tractors are left running. Mr. Emerson responded not in the parking lot. They might be left running on the back side of the building when the trailers are being loaded.

Commissioner Duren stated this facility is close to residential homes and there have already been complaints about backup beepers and trucks running at night. Mr. Emerson doesn’t believe that tractors have beepers when they back up. Dave Ciemniewski 35 Parker Street, stated he has a Class I license and under OSHA and federal DOT laws, the trucks have to have beepers.

Mr. Emerson noted this was Lego’s distribution facility and they were moving trucks in and out of that facility. He believes their operation is not dissimilar from Hasbro’s. Commissioner Duren stated not to the number or extent Hasbro is talking about.

Chairman DiPace stated they are talking about moving sixty trailers per day at their busiest time. Commissioner Weseliza noted this would be during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.

Chairman DiPace stated the only driveway out of this building is on to Print Shop Road. Mr. Emerson stated for security purposes, Hasbro has asked them to put up a fence on the back road. They just need to make sure it is okay with the Fire Marshal.

Commissioner Ladd asked about Cybulski Road. Mr. Emerson stated they have agreed to put a sign at the end of Cybulski Road and at the end of Print Shop Road indicating that Cybulski Road is not for Hasbro traffic and Print Shop Road is. Mr. Emerson added that in the past Cybulski and Print Shop Road served as both entrances to Lego. Now Lego only has one entrance off Moody Road and Print Shop Road will no longer be an entrance for tractor trailer traffic from that side. Lego no longer has tractor trailers operating at their facility. Mr. Emerson addressed Cybulski Road and stated in the past trucks would turn into Cybulski Road because they weren’t sure which entrance was the correct one. Now there is only one Lego entrance off Moody Road. Print Shop Road will now be exclusively for Hasbro. Because of that, tractor trailers going on Cybulski should no longer be an issue.

Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the audience.

Eileen Cybulski, 8 Cybulski Road, stated as far as no trucks coming down Cybulski Road, they have experienced that ever since they put the office complex in for Lego. They were told there would be no trucks coming down Cybulski Road but they come down the road all the time. They were told there would be a sign put up and there was never a sign put up. When trucks come down the road, the only way out is for them to back out because of Lego’s gate. If there are cars on the street or children playing on the street, it could be a very dangerous situation. Ms. Cybulski stated if the Commission does approve this, she would ask as part of the conditions that the Commission have them put up a sign. Chairman DiPace stated the signs should read no truck traffic and no turning around.

Ms. Cybulski stated there is also a concern that there could be reefers that would be parked down there. She would like that to be a condition that no reefers would be allowed to park there. In this way, Martin Brower won’t try to lease part of that parking lot. Ms. Cybulski discussed the hours of operation and that they could not limit the truck traffic to 9:00 p.m. They said occasionally they would have third shift. Ms. Cybulski noted that occasional can turn into all the time. This will add to the noise in the area. She felt the movement of three trucks per hour is a lot especially in the evening hours. Print Shop Road was used for a lot of truck traffic and while they did have truck traffic, mainly it was a production warehouse. That parking lot was used for parking cars and not trucks.

Paul Cormier, 504 Taylor Road, stated his concern is the children. There are a lot of children on Taylor Road with these trucks coming down. At night they do hear a lot of noise. Those are his concerns especially the children.

Sandy Machinski, 249 Moody Road, stated she opposes the approval of the renovating of the Lego parking lot to accommodate or warehouse eighteen wheeler trailers for storage purposes. Twenty years ago she purchased her home at 249 Moody Road. This residence is located at the intersection of Moody and Somers Road. In the past years the amount of truck traffic as well as regular vehicles has increased more than 500 percent. Trucks traveling to Martin Brower on Moody Road as well as Fed Ex trucks run non stop at this intersection. Many accidents have taken place. The traffic has become a nightmare. It takes five to ten minutes for her to exit her driveway. There is the issue of the condition of Moody Road, Somers Road and Taylor Road. A few years ago the town repaved Moody Road between Taylor and Somers Road. After the truck traffic to and from Lego, Martin Brower and Hallmark, one has to ask can the Town of Enfield afford to keep these roads in good condition and keep repaving every few years. Ms. Machinski stated her home as well as many of her neighbor’s homes shake and rattle when these vehicles pass by not to mention the noise they produce. She asked if Commission members would like to have this noise and traffic in front of their homes twenty four hours a day. Another issue is the school aged children waiting for school buses and their safety. She urged the Commission to vote no on this application.

Susan Pluckenger, 15 Somers Road, stated a lot of her information will echo the previous speaker’s. Her concern is the amount of trucks that will be coming down Somers Road. Somers Road is used as a short cut to I-90. There are trucks from Martin Brower, Fed Ex and Hallmark and now to add on another company leaves her very concerned. If this project is approved, Ms. Pluckenger would like to see a stipulation prohibiting the truck traffic on Somers Road. She doesn’t believe that Somers Road is wide enough for the amount of vehicles that use that road. Chairman DiPace stated it is a public road and the Commission can suggest but not stop trucks from using this road. Ms. Pluckenger talked to the Department of Transportation and the gentleman indicated that some roads can be approved for not having trucks pass through. Chairman DiPace stated legally the Commission cannot stop the truck traffic. Ms. Pluckenger discussed the traffic on Somers Road and stated her mailbox has been hit about six times in the past four months. Her biggest concern is having that many additional vehicles on such a small road.

Gretchen Pfeiffer Hall, 4 Somers Road, presented a photo of the front of her home on Somers Road. She put a long board across the street. When she was here at the last meeting, she informed the Commission how the street was ripped up by the Connecticut Water Company to put in a new line and how the road from the intersection of Bilton Road, down Taylor Road, down Somers Road to Moody has settled extensively. It is all rippled and it has settled three inches in front of her mailbox. The picture will give the Commission an idea of the condition of the road and trucks will continue to make it worse. Ms. Pfeiffer Hall is opposed to this application.

Chairman DiPace asked if Ms. Pfeiffer Hall has talked to Public Works about this road. Ms. Pfeiffer Hall stated she has not. She stated the conditions are worse at the intersection of Moody and Somers Road where the previous speakers reside. Chairman DiPace asked Mr. Giner to forward the photo to Public Works and Engineering to see what can be done about this road.

Ms. Pfeiffer Hall stated she thinks when Moody Road was reconstructed twenty-five years ago, it was widened specifically for the industrial businesses that were coming on to Moody Road. She did not think they were ever intending that the traffic go through Moody Road and Somers Road to Somersville. It was all expected to go toward I-91. They are now the short cut. Ms. Pfeiffer Hall did ask that a sign be put up about no trucks and a state trooper from Somers made her take it down. She discussed signs that are allowed and respected in other towns and questioned why Enfield could not do the same.

Chairman DiPace stated you can post a sign that says trucks are requested not to use this road but you cannot say no through trucks. He felt a sign should be posted on Somers Road.

Further discussion followed on New England Tractor Trailers.

Ms. Pfeiffer Hall stated Somers Road is a narrow road with no shoulder and it is a dangerous situation. The other question was regarding the drainage from these trucks. Chairman DiPace stated they will only be parking trailers. As far as the hours of operation, Ms. Pfeiffer Hall stated she thinks the hours will be more than 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.

Mr. Emerson stated they would have no problem with a sign that says in addition to no trucks on Cybulski Road to adding no turn around. They also have no problem with prohibiting refrigerator trucks in the parking lot.

Chairman DiPace discussed the hours of operation. He has concerns with three shifts running because of the nearby homes. Mr. Emerson stated it is a function of demand from their customers. Chairman DiPace asked what compromise will Mr. Emerson give regarding the hours of operation. Mr. Emerson did not know how often they run three shifts and how critical it is for them.

Sean Duffy with Cushman and Wakefield has worked for a number of years on behalf of Lego and he spoke to the Commission. Mr. Duffy stated he has also worked for Hasbro. The Commission should understand that Hasbro’s contemplated use is for 290,000 square feet of warehouse which is substantially similar to what Lego used it for. Lego had at all times at least 180,000 square feet of warehousing space so in the nature and character of this operation, it would be no different than what Lego used it for just six months ago. Chairman DiPace stated the trailer storage is being added. Mr. Duffy stated it changes the number of trailer units that are in the yard but not by a significant amount. Lego had trailer storage in the back and used a connector road and stored at least thirty trailers along both sides of that road for many years. When Lego ran its own three-shift operation, it had several hundred cars in this parking lot and it was at least as noisy as having two jockey trailers moving trailers back and forth. Commissioner Duren noted cars don’t have beepers on them.

Mr. Duffy stated Lego’s operation at various times was twenty-four hours, seven days a week. Hasbro’s operation is similar and the peak season is the same. The periods of time when the property is burdened by late use are no different. The reason that Hasbro focused on this facility is that it was set up exactly for the distribution center. The Commission should be aware that if the storage use is not allowed in this way, then the time for the next occupant will be long. Burdening this site with hours and restrictions will severely impact the landlord’s ability to lease the space.

Commissioner Duren asked if Lego was moving four trucks an hour all night long. Mr. Duffy stated during their peak seasons they were. He noted the businesses are largely seasonal.

Commissioner Duren stated the concern is the movement of the trucks and the noise they produce for the neighbors in the area. He asked again if Lego had three to four trucks per hour going out. Mr. Duffy stated they did during their peak seasons. He would suggest to the Commission that regarding having trailer storage on site, Hasbro’s transportation model is slightly different in that they own all their trailers and keep them on site. They use them for shipping and storage which is slightly different than Lego who doesn’t keep a majority of the trailers on their site. Mr. Duffy noted trailer storage itself is not indicative of increased volumes of activity. Trailers sit idle and can for long periods of time.

Chairman DiPace felt it is a drastic change with the parking of all these trailers. There needs to be some consideration given to the neighbors because the sound does travel. He asked again if there is any give regarding the hours of operation or is it all or nothing. Mr. Duffy stated it is not twenty-four hours a day 365 days a year. They would need twenty-four hours a day from October to December. The upward use starts in late summer and is generally a fourth quarter activity. Mr. Emerson stated Hasbro would like to move into this facility by July 15.

Mr. Duffy stated he was responsible for selling this property to Equity Industrial and was responsible for leasing the property. Their inability to deliver this property by July 15 precludes their occupancy until the next season. This space will stay idle until December 15. There are no other prospects even given until next July. You will have trouble finding occupants of this size and character.

Chairman DiPace asked if these trailers stored on the property will be sitting idle for long periods of time and will they be registered in Connecticut. State law says if they are going to be in one place for more than sixty days, they have to be registered. Mr. Duffy stated that would be an entirely reasonable stipulation.

Chairman DiPace asked if two jockey trucks will be the maximum. Mr. Emerson stated the real estate director for Hasbro told him two. Mr. Duffy asked if that is a restriction that anyone else in Enfield has on their operation. Commissioner Duren noted the closeness to the residents and the Commission’s desire to protect both the residents and Hasbro. Chairman DiPace brought up the old Shaker buildings on Cybulski Road that cannot be replaced and need to be protected. That is why the question of movement on the site is important. It was made clear to Lego that there was to be no truck traffic on Cybulski Road.

Mr. Duffy had a concern that with two jockey trucks it would not allow for any flexibility. When Lego operated that facility they would have as many as twelve trucks in the front of that building facing Print Shop Road at any given time. Hasbro won’t have docks on the front side of the building. Hasbro has proposed to occupy the 300,000 square feet behind the office space on the north side of the building leaving the front and back docks idle. With making the restriction so fine, Mr. Duffy noted it would make the use less intensive than what it was used for six months ago.

Mr. Emerson stated there may be a need for three jockey trucks at some times. Chairman DiPace stated the Commission needs to know which it is. Mr. Duffy reiterated that having more than two jockey trucks wouldn’t unreasonably burden the site any more than it was a few months ago when Lego used it. Following additional discussion, Commissioner Ladd asked if four jockey trucks would be acceptable. Mr. Duffy acknowledged that four would be reasonable.

Chairman DiPace brought up the hours of operation and asked if twenty-four hour use would be from September 1 to November 30. Mr. Duffy asked that it be extended to December 15.

Chairman DiPace stated there should be a sign on Cybulski Road stating no truck traffic and no truck turn around access.

Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the audience again.

Eileen Cybulski stated the distribution plant on the corner of Taylor Road and Shaker Road is where the truck traffic went in and out. She felt the use is different than Lego being down there. You’re talking about trucks being moved around twenty-four hours a day. She would hope that if the Commission approves it there are conditions on their hours because the residents hear enough beeping as it is. For the applicant to say it is no different than Lego, he didn’t live there and hasn’t lived there like the residents. They are going to be putting these trucks in to use as additional warehouse space and they will be moved around causing a lot of noise. Ms. Cybulski asked that the Commission restrict the hours for the neighbors.

Gretchen Pfeifer Hall stated this whole scenario is a good reason why the railroad tracks should be reopened to get some of these trucks off the road. There are a great amount of trucks coming through the neighborhoods and the town and the thing that is not being considered is the trucks that are going to be leaving this facility and going out to I-84 via Somers Road. It is not just the moving around within the parking area but the additional truck traffic.

Sue Pluckenger, 15 Somers Road, wanted Hasbro to know that her main concern is the size of the road and the amount of trucks. She also wanted them to know that she is advocating for her son. She has a special needs son and he’s severely autistic with sensory dysfunction disorder. He is more prone to what is going on and although he’s fifteen years old now, he still is up throughout the night with the truck beeping.

Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.

Commissioner Weseliza made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Duren, to waive the full submission requirements of Section 9.10.2 for SPR#1405 because the Commission finds that the information is not necessary in order to decide on the application’s conformance with these Regulations. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Sarno voting.

Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Cooper, to approve SPR #1405 – Application for conversion and re-striping of parking lot off Print Shop Road to accommodate parking of trailers at Lego Campus at 555 Taylor Road, Zoned I-1, Map 99, Lot 11, Equity Industrial Enfield LP, Applicant/Owner., This application is subject to conformance with the referenced plans and the following conditions:

Referenced Plans:

“Preliminary Layout Plan – Trailer Storage Lot, 555 Taylor Road, Equity Industrial Partners”, Scale 1”=40’, by Megson & Heagle, dated 5-22-07.

Conditions to be Met Prior to Signing of Plans:

1. Standard Town Notes shall be added to the plans.

2. as the relocated catch basin shall be provided for the review and approval of the Engineering Division.

3. Appropriate Fire Lane markings and signage shall be indicated where requested by the Fire Marshall.

4. The application number (SPR #1405) shall be displayed on the plans in or near the Title Block area.

5. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns.

Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits:

6. Two sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning Department for signature of the Commission.

Conditions which must be met prior to the Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance or Use of the facilities approved with this application :

7. No Certificate of Occupancy or other final approval may be issued until the applicant has received a Certificate of Site Plan Compliance from the Planning Department. When minor site work cannot be completed because of weather or other pertinent reason, a conditional Certificate of Site Plan Compliance may be issued for a period not to exceed 180 days, providing satisfactory surety shall be posted with the Town of Enfield in an amount sufficient to complete the site work and with surety acceptable to the Town Attorney and Finance Department.

8. A request for Certificate of Site Plan Compliance from the Planning Department must be made at least 10 days before a Certificate of Occupancy or other final approval is requested.

General Conditions:

9. This approval includes a modification of the parking Lot Landscaping Standards of Section 10.10.7 B with the finding that the existing vegetation is sufficient to protect adjoining properties. No clear cutting of existing buffer vegetation may occur without the approval of the Commission.

10. This approval is for the specific use and improvements identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the improvements will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.

11. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.

12. All work associated with the construction of facilities as approved must be completed by July 12, 2012 or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission.

13. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.

14. The approval is limited to only four jockey trailer trucks.

15. Trailers are to be registered in Enfield, Connecticut.

16. There are to be no refrigerator trucks or trailers.

17. A sign shall be installed at the end of Cybulski Road that says “no turn around available and no trucks.”

18. Hours of operation shall be 7:00 a.m. until 11:00 p.m. except for September 1 to December 15 which is twenty four hours.

Commissioner Hickey feels the concerns of the community are very well taken. He can appreciate what is involved with the truck traffic in the area. However, it is a site zoned industrial. This application is a site plan review and not a special use. The applicant is meeting the site plan criteria and he would be in favor of the waiver for the site plan requirements and the modification of landscaping requirements. Commissioner Hickey thinks the use meets the criteria.

Chairman DiPace concurred and noted it is an industrial parcel of land. They did have Lego in there prior to this use.

Chairman DiPace requested that Mr. Giner look into getting signs for Somers Road and Moody Road where they head east. Such signs would state that trucks are requested not to use these roads. Chairman DiPace would appreciate it if Hasbro tries to avoid using Somers Road because it is a very narrow road.

The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Sarno voting.

PUBLIC HEARINGS - NEW

a. PH#2606 – Special Use Permit for medical office for patient service facility at 54 Hazard Avenue, zoned BR, Map 56, Lot 26, Quest Diagnostics Inc., Applicant/C/O Samuels & Associates, Owner. (Must close by 7/26)

Attorney Susan Hays and Dorothy Burts appeared before the Commission regarding this application. Attorney Hays presented an affidavit for the public hearing sign, authorization from Samuels for the application and the portion of the lease document that allows Quest Diagnostics Inc. to submit the application for the special permit.

Attorney Hays stated this use would be located in the Stop & Shop Plaza on Hazard Avenue. This use will go in the space next to the Hallmark store. The proposal is to put a Quest Diagnostic patient facility there. They are asking for a special permit for medical offices. There will be no laboratory work done at the facility. It will be sample drawing only. The hours of operation are anticipated to be 6:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on weekdays and 7:00 p.m. to noon on Saturdays with no Sunday operation.

Attorney Hays stated Quest likes to be in these types of facilities because it is convenient for patrons.

Commissioner Duren stated most people will come in during the morning hours.

Dorothy Burts stated they have outgrown their former space and this new facility is needed.

Commissioner Hickey felt this is a non-traditional use for a retail development. He asked if there is an interest in expanding the medical uses further and getting away from the retail uses there. Attorney Hays would say that is not their intent. They would prefer retail because it is more profitable. There is no plan to switch this over to a medical type of facility.

Chairman DiPace opened this public hearing to the audience. No one spoke in favor or against this application. Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.

Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ballard, to approve PH #2606 – Special Use Permit for medical office for patient service facility at 54 Hazard Ave., Zoned BR, Map 56, Lot 26, Quest Diagnostics Inc., Applicant/C/O Samuels & Associates, Owner. This application is subject to conformance with the submitted record and the following conditions:

Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits:

This approval will become effective upon the filing of a Special Use Zoning Certificate signed by the Commission Secretary on the Land records by the owner of the property. Proof of such filing shall be in the file prior to the issuance of any permits.

General Conditions:

This approval is for the specific use and structures identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the structures will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.

This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the submitted record. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.

Any necessary permits for the construction or operation of the use as approved must be within one year of the effective date of this approval or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission.

The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting.

b. PH#2607 – Application for a Special Use Permit to build a new house on a farm in an Industrial Zone at 114 North Street, Zoned I-1, Map 100, Lot 4, Neal C. Peterson, Applicant/Owner. (Must close by 7/26).

Neal Peterson, 55 Sharon Lane, appeared before the Commission regarding this application. He is looking to build a new farm house. They are trying to use thermal heat. They would use special insulation and take the heat and cold out of the ground and run it through a heat exchanger and run it throughout the house. Mr. Peterson stated he plans to live in the house.

Mr. Giner stated this application meets all the requirements. It is a special permit because it is in an industrial zone. They are abandoning the existing house and converting that into a barn. Wetlands has approved it.

Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public. No one spoke in favor or against this application.

Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve PH #2607 – Application for a Special Use Permit to build a new house on a 16.30+/- acre farm in an Industrial Zone at 114 North Street, Zoned I-1, Map 100, Lot 4, Neal C. Peterson, Applicant/Owner. This application is subject to conformance with the Referenced Plans and the following conditions:

Referenced Plans:

“Site Plan – Peterson Family Residence, Assessor’s Lot R75, 114 North Street, Enfield, Connecticut, July 2006”, 2 Sheets, Scale: 1”=20’, by R.R. Hiltbrand Engineers and Surveyors, dated July 2006 and revised to 01-16-07.

Conditions to be met prior to signing of mylars:

1. The application number PH#2588 shall be placed on the final plans above the Title Block.

2. All plans submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.

3. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns.

Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits:

4. One set of mylars and two sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning Department for signature of the Commission.

5. In accordance with Section 9.10.6 of the Regulations, the applicant shall also submit final plans in a digital format prescribed by the Director

6. This approval will become effective upon the filing of a Special Use Zoning Certificate signed by the Commission Secretary on the Land records by the owner of the property. Proof of such filing shall be in the file prior to the issuance of any permits.

Conditions which must be met prior to the Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance :

7. Complete as-built plans certified to Class A-2 accuracy shall be submitted prior to the issuance of any certificates of zoning compliance.

General Conditions:

8. This approval is for the specific use and structure identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the structure will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.

9. The house is approved in conjunction with a farming operation on the same parcel. The lot may not be divided to permit the use of the residence as a stand-alone use.

10. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.

11. A building permit for the construction of facilities as approved must be obtained within one year of the effective date or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission in accordance with the Enfield Zoning Regulations.

12. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.

Commissioner Hickey felt this is a unique use and it meets the special use criteria and in no way does it jeopardize the industrial nature of the property.

The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting.

b. PH#2479.02 – Resubdivision to revise previously approved resubdivision plans to replace pump station and force main with a gravity sanitary sewer at River Overlook Resubdivision, west side of Riverview Street, zoned R-33, Map 19, Lot 10, Margaret Pappas, Applicant/Owner. (Must close by 7/26.)

Tim Coon of J. R. Russo and Associates appeared before the Commission regarding this application. He noted a three-lot subdivision was recently approved off Riverview Street. This subdivision was approved with sanitary service to be provided via a pump station located down at the end of the cul de sac and a forced main which was going to pump up to an existing gravity line in Riverview Street. The area around the pump station was going to be made part of the right of way. Subsequent to the approval of River Overlook, there was an approval of River Meadow, Section Two, a fifteen lot subdivision off Meetinghouse Lane and Bridge Lane. This subdivision was approved with a gravity sewer to come down and tie into an existing gravity trunk line and an easement on the property. With the approval of River Meadow Section Two, there is now the opportunity to eliminate the need for the pump station and forced main at River Overlook and run a gravity line down and tie into the River Meadow Section Two gravity sewer that exists there.

Mr. Coon stated the gravity sewer will require less maintenance than a pump station and this will benefit the town who will own and maintain whatever is constructed out there. The application is considered a resubdivision but it is more of a modification of the previously approved subdivision. It is really a technical change because the only modification to the plans is that little area of land which was around the pump station which will now be added to Lot 3. Mr. Coon stated they are changing the lot line, adding a little more area to lot 3 and running the sanitary sewer across country from the cul de sac down to River Meadow Section 3 through some easements on Lot 1 at River Overlook through some remaining land of Margaret R. Pappas and through Lot 12 of River Meadow Section Two.

Mr. Coon stated these plans were developed with the input of the WPCA. They were designed to meet all their criteria. The latest correspondence received from Marvin Sierra requested that the plans be modified to include a manhole in the center of the cul de sac. This can be done as a condition of approval.

Mr. Coon stated they did receive Inland Wetlands approval for this project and at their request, they will be replacing an existing culvert that exists as part of this. All the engineering comments have been addressed. Mr. Coon stated this is a technical change and it still meets all the requirements of the subdivision regulations.

Chairman DiPace felt this change is a benefit to the town. He opened the public hearing to the audience. No one spoke in favor or against this application.

Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.

Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve PH#2479.02 – Resubdivision to revise previously approved resubdivision plans to replace pump station and force main with a gravity sanitary sewer at River Overlook Resubdivision, west side of Riverview Street, zoned R-33, Map 19, Lot 10, Margaret Pappas, Applicant/Owner. This approval is subject to conformance with the referenced plans as may be required to be modified by this motion and the following conditions:

Conditions to be met prior to signing of Mylars:

1. The Plans shall be revised to indicate the application number as “PH#2479.02 rather than “PH2479.2”.

2. For all sewer pipes show on the drawing(s), the length, diameter, slope, location, and type of pipe; for inverts show elevation in and out, and for frame(s) show elevation at top.

3. A note shall be added that the sewer system shall conform to Town of Enfield, Subdivision Regulations, revised as of February 12, 2002, and on the Town of Enfield Public Works Department drawings titled Typical Details I, II and III.

4. The plans shall show the sanitary sewer main extended from SMH#B to a sanitary manhole in the middle of the cul de sac.

5. All mylars submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.

6. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns. A copy of this approval motion shall be incorporated on to the final mylars prior to the signing of the mylars.

General Conditions

7. There is a more extensive set of conditions for the original approval, PH#2479; all conditions of that approval not specifically modified by this approval are to remain in full force and effect.

8. Two sets of final mylars, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted for signature to the Commission. One set of signed mylars shall be filed with the Town Clerk and one set shall be retained by the Planning Department.

9. Final plans reflecting the approval of the Commission shall also be submitted in a digital format prescribed by the Director of Planning.

10. Signed mylars shall be filed with the Town Clerk no later than ninety (90) days from the expiration of the appeal period or this approval shall be null and void. The applicants shall provide such mylars to the Planning Department sufficiently in advance of this deadline to allow for review of the plans and the arrangement for the Commission Secretary to sign the mylars. The applicant may request an extension of the filing deadline in accordance with Section 8-25 of the Connecticut General Statutes. Any extension requests must be received in time to allow the Commission to act on them before the original deadline expires.

11. A pre-construction meeting between the applicant, site contractors, project engineer and Town Staff shall be held.

12. No building permits may be issued and no lots may be sold within the subdivision prior to a Final Approval being filed on the Land Records.

13. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.

14. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.

The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting.

d. PH#2605 – Petition for text amendment to Section 3.30.7 of the Enfield Zoning Regulations to allow accessory structures in Industrial and Business Districts to be located behind the front building line, Town of Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission, Applicant.

Mr. Giner stated this is a regulation change that came out of Senior Aerospace where they wanted to keep one of their sheds on the side yard. They had wetlands in the back and it made sense. Presently, all residential accessory structures are required to be behind the rear building line. For commercial buildings, this regulation will allow them to be located behind the front building line but not where they front residential zones. If they abut a residential zone, they would have to keep such accessory structures in the back. There is also a limit of 600 square feet on an accessory structure that was added and anything larger can still come in under a special permit. CRCOG had been given a referral on this and they reported back that there was no conflict with regional plans and policies. This proposed regulation will allow some flexibility for these interior lots in industrial zones to put garages and sheds up where it makes more sense.

Commissioner Ladd asked if some type of buffer shouldn’t be put in the front such as tree plantings. Mr. Giner stated they would still be subject to a site plan review and the Commission will have an opportunity to look at the plans. Also, anything over 600 square feet would be subject to a special use permit with a public hearing. Mr. Giner recommended an effective date of August 1, 2007.

Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the audience. No one spoke in favor or against this application. Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.

Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Cooper, to approve PH#2605, petition for text amendment to Section 3.30.7 of the Enfield Zoning Regulations to allow accessory structures in Industrial and Business Districts to be located behind the front building line with an effective date of August 1, 2007. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting.

OLD BUSINESS

a. PH#2601 – Petition for zone change from Industrial, I-1, to Residential R-33, for property located at southwest corner of the intersection of North Street and Taylor Road (Assessor’s Map 100, Parcel 1), Pace Construction, Applicant/Edward Carrera, Trustee, Owner.

Commissioner Duren read a letter dated July 2, 2007 from Attorney Charles Parakilas withdrawing Public Hearing #2601.

Commissioner Weseliza made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Cooper, to accept the letter of withdrawal from Attorney Charles Parakilas regarding PH#2601 without prejudice. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting.

b. SPR#1403 – Application to convert former Hamilton Sunstrand Credit Union into Pizza Restaurant at 410 Enfield Street, zoned BL, Map 33, Lot 206, Harry Bacopoulos, Applicant, Hamilton Standard Federal Credit Union, Owner. (Decision by 7/12/07 meeting.)

Mr. Viet appeared before the Commission regarding this application. Mr. Giner stated the applicant has calculated the pervious coverage and by subtraction calculated the impervious coverage on the lot. It comes out to about 64.1% impervious after the changes. This is including the walk-in cooler.

Chairman DiPace asked if staff has verified it. Mr. Giner stated as best as can be done without a survey. He has done the calculations and checked the areas and added them up. The way it was done is they measured the grass areas and then by subtraction came up with the pervious coverage. Chairman DiPace asked if someone signed off that this is accurate. Mr. Giner noted it is not a survey but a calculation based on the plan submitted. There are no surveys available that they were able to find. Commissioner Duren stated it was Northern Connecticut National Bank but that was many years ago. Mr. Giner was unable to find any surveys in the index.

Chairman DiPace asked how this is handled as far as verification. Mr. Giner went over the calculations and they work. He noted normally you get a survey. The alternative is if you don’t want to go by this, without having to go through the expense of a survey, if you assume they are under right now or grandfathered with what they have, the Commission can require them to landscape over an equal amount of what their building increase is. In that way, there will be no impact at all on the impervious coverage.

Chairman DiPace stated they are only putting a freezer in the back and he asked about the square footage. Mr. Giner stated it is 120 square feet. They are also asking for a waiver of the site plan.

Mr. Giner stated another alternative would be to require a survey and a full calculation.

Mr. Giner reiterated the impervious coverage would be 64%. The limit is 66%.

Chairman DiPace stated there are no records available and this is a good location and a good use. The increase to the site is 120 square feet.

Commissioner Hickey felt it is a minor increase for a 17,000 square foot lot and he would be willing to accept the applicant’s measurements.

Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Cooper, to waive the full submission requirements of Section 9.10.2 for SPR#1403 because the Commission finds that the information is not necessary in order to decide on the application’s conformance with these Regulations. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting.

Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ladd, to approve SPR#1403 – Application to convert former Hamilton Sunstrand Credit Union into Pizza Restaurant at 410 Enfield Street, zoned BL, Map 33, Lot 206, Harry Bacopoulos, Applicant/Hamilton Standard Federal Credit Union, Owner. This application is subject to conformance with the referenced plans and the following conditions:

Referenced Plans:

“Proposed Plans for 410 Enfield Street, Baco’s Pizza Inc.” stamped “received” by the Planning Office on June 6, 2007. 14 Sheets including Cover.

“Baco’s Pizza, Enfield, CT. First Floor Plan” scale ½”=1’0” by Kittredge Equipment Company, Inc. dated 4/7/07, stamped “received” by the Planning Office on June 13, 2007.

Conditions to be met prior to signing of plans:

1. The application number (SPR#1403) shall be displayed on the plans in or near the title block area.

2. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns.

Conditions to be m et prior to the issuance of permits:

3. Two sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning Department for signature of the Commission.

Conditions which must be met prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance or Use of the facilities approved with this applications:

4. The dumpster shall be placed on a concrete pad made of 4000 psi portland concrete, 8 inches thick with wire mesh reinforcing set on a processed stone base also 8 inches thick.

5. No Certificate of Occupancy or other final approval may be issued until the applicant has received a Certificate of Site Plan Compliance from the Planning Department. When minor site work cannot be completed because of weather or other pertinent reason, a conditional Certificate of Site Plan Compliance may be issued for a period not to exceed 180 days, provided satisfactory surety shall be posted with the Town of Enfield in an amount sufficient to complete the site work and with surety acceptable to the Town Attorney and Finance Department.

6. A request for Certificate of Site Plan Compliance from the Planning Department must be made at least 10 days before a Certificate of Occupancy or other final approval is requested.

General Conditions:

7. The existing drive-through operation is being discontinued. Any reinstatement of the drive-through operation would require a Special Permit under the current regulations.

8. This approval is for the specific use and improvements identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the improvements will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.

9. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.

10. All work associated with the construction of facilities as approved must be completed by July 12, 2012 or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission.

11. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.

The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote.

BOND RELEASE

a. SPR#1377 – Request for release of Engineering Bond in the amount of $23,100 by AAA at 109 Elm Street, zoned BL, Map 43, Lot 7.

Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve the request for release of the engineering bond for SPR#1377 in the amount of $23,100 by AAA at 109 Elm Street. The motion was approved by a 6 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting (Commissioner Ballard was not present for this vote.) Reference is made to a July 6, 2007 memo from John Cabibbo to Jose Giner recommending release.

NEW BUSINESS

a. SPR#1406 – Application for opening a martial arts school at 95 High Street (Unit #8), zoned TV, Map 25, Lot 6, David J. Ciemniewski, Applicant/SRT Associates, Owner. (Decision by 7/26/07 Meeting.)

Dave Ciemniewski, 35 Parker Street, stated he currently has a martial arts school at 937 Enfield Street. He would like to move it to a bigger facility at 95 High Street. It would be the end unit in that commercial plaza.

Mr. Giner stated this has gone to the Enfield Revitalization and Strategy Committee and they recommended approval. No site work is proposed and it would require a waiver of the full site plan requirements. The old site plan would be used because it is interior work only.

Commissioner Cooper made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to waive the full submission requirements of Section 9.10.2 for SPR#1406 because the Commission finds that the information is not necessary in order to decide on the application’s conformance with these Regulations. The motion was approved by a 6 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting. (Commissioner Duren was not present for this vote.)

Commissioner Hickey made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Cooper, to approve SPR #1406 – Application for opening a martial arts school at 95 High Street (Unit #8), Zoned TV, Map 25, Lot 6, David J. Ciemniewski, Applicant/SRT Associates, Owner. This application is subject to conformance with the submitted record and the following conditions:

General Conditions:

1. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns.

2. This approval is for the specific use and improvements identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the improvements will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.

3. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.

4. Any new signage shall be in keeping with the size and style already in place

5. Any changes to the exterior require additional review by the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission and the Revitalization Committee.

6. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.

The motion was approved by a 6 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting. (Commissioner Duren was not present for this vote.)

b. SPR#1408 – Application for expansion of existing parking at 25 Bacon Road, zoned I-1, Map 95, Lot 2, Hallmark Cards, Inc., Applicant/Owner. (Decision by 7/26/07 Meeting.)

Scott Wakus from DBH Integrated Services appeared before the Commission representing Hallmark Cards. The existing facility is located on a 300-acre parcel. The current operation for the facility is requiring the movement of some employees from another facility to this area. With that movement of employees, the applicant is requesting to enlarge the front lot. Mr. Wakus pointed out the area on the site plan. On the site right now there is existing storm water management facilities in place from the previous construction of the facility. There is a drainage swale that runs parallel with the front lot into a storm water management pond. With the addition of the new parking lot, they are adding some new storm drainage and some water quality measures as per the Town of Enfield requirements. The Town Engineer has reviewed the storm drainage report as well as the plans and found them to be in accordance with the Town of Enfield requirements.

Mr. Wakus stated the other modifications that they will be doing to the parking lot include relocating the existing lighting and adding one additional light on the side. As far as the landscaping requirements, they are requesting a waiver of the landscaping requirements to fifteen percent. Mr. Wakus noted this site is on a 300-acre parcel which is set back quite a distance from Bacon Road. The majority of the buffer between the road and the facility is all wooded. They are around ten percent of the landscaping requirements. They will be adding new landscaping in one area and new landscaping islands in another area. There are existing landscaped grass areas surrounding the parking as well as a very large landscaped area that will remain.

Chairman DiPace asked what the total number of parking spaces will be. Mr. Wakus stated 614 parking spaces with some handicapped parking added. There is an accessible entrance at the rear of the building and they are providing some handicapped spaces at the rear of the building. They will decrease the spaces in the back to 97. They would not be doing any physical work in the back other than re-striping.

Mr. Wakus stated they have shown some trees in the area to be planted. The applicant has expressed a desire to reduce some of the plantings if its found acceptable to the Commission. This area is really surrounded by trees in all directions.

Commissioner Weseliza stated they do take care of their property.

Mr. Wakus stated they did have a staff review meeting and there was a comment from the Fire Marshal to do some striping and lettering for fire lanes. They have included that in the package before the Commission. They will be providing some striping and lettering for the fire lanes as well as some signage. There will be self-standing signs that state fire lane, no parking.

Mr. Giner recommended an additional condition that a note needs to be placed on the plan about an engineer has to be retained during construction. Mr. Wakus stated there is a general note on the front page of the document that states the contractor shall provide a licensed survey certified by a surveyor in the State of Connecticut. In addition to that, the applicant is willing to retain the services of a professional engineer to certify the drainage.

Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Cooper, to approve SPR #1408 – Application for expansion of existing parking at 25 Bacon Road, Zoned I-1, Map 95, Lot 2, Hallmark Cards, Inc., Applicant/Owner. This application is subject to conformance with the referenced plans and the following conditions:

Referenced Plans:

“Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Planning & Zoning Submission Title Sheet with drawing list and Location Plan dated June 6, 2007 (revised June 27, 2007).

“Civil Abbreviations, Legend, and General Notes, Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Drawing No. C-0.0, Scale: “None”, by BVH Integrated Services, dated 6/6/07, revised to 6/27/07.

“Site Location Plan, Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Drawing No. C-0.1, Scale: 1”=150’, by BVH Integrated Services, dated 6/6/07, revised to 6/27/07.

“Site Demolition Plan, Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Drawing No. C-1.0, Scale: 1”=30’, by BVH Integrated Services, dated 6/6/07, revised to 6/27/07.

“Site Dimensional Layout Plan, Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Drawing No. C-2.0, Scale: 1”=30’, by BVH Integrated Services, dated 6/6/07, revised to 6/27/07.

“Site Layout and Materials Plan, Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Drawing No. C-3.0, Scale: 1”=30’, by BVH Integrated Services, dated 6/6/07, revised to 6/27/07.

“Handicap Parking Layout-Rear Parking Area #2, Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Drawing No. C-3.1, Scale: 1”=30’, by BVH Integrated Services, dated 6/6/07, revised to 6/27/07.

“Site Landscape Plan, Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Drawing No. C-3.2, Scale: 1”=30’, by BVH Integrated Services, dated 6/6/07, revised to 6/27/07.

“Site Grading and Drainage & Soil Erosion Control Plan, Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Drawing No. C-4.0, Scale: 1”=30’, by BVH Integrated Services, dated 6/6/07, revised to 6/27/07.

“Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Narr. and Details, Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Drawing No. C-5.0, Scale: “As noted”, by BVH Integrated Services, dated 6/6/07, revised to 6/27/07.

“Site Details, Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Drawing No. C-5.1, Scale: “As noted”, by BVH Integrated Services, dated 6/6/07, revised to 6/27/07.

“Site Details, Parking Lot Expansion Hallmark Cards, 25 Bacon Road, Enfield, Connecticut 06083” Drawing No. C-5.2, Scale: “As noted”, by BVH Integrated Services, dated 6/6/07, revised to 6/27/07.

Conditions to be Met Prior to Signing of Plans:

1. All plans submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.

2. The application number (SPR #1408) shall be displayed on the plans in or near the Title Block area.

3. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns. A copy of the approval conditions shall be incorporated onto the final plans.

Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits or beginning of work:

4. Three sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning Department for signature of the Commission.

5. An Erosion and Sediment Control and Site Restoration Bond shall be submitted in the form of cash or a check, in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer.

6. A landscaping bond, in an amount to be determined by the Planning Department shall be submitted to the Town.

Conditions which must be met prior to the Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance or Use of the facilities approved with this application :

7. No Certificate of Occupancy or other final approval may be issued until the applicant has received a Certificate of Site Plan Compliance from the Planning Department. When minor site work cannot be completed because of weather or other pertinent reason, a conditional Certificate of Site Plan Compliance may be issued for a period not to exceed 180 days, providing satisfactory surety shall be posted with the Town of Enfield in an amount sufficient to complete the site work and with surety acceptable to the Town Attorney and Finance Department.

8. A request for Certificate of Site Plan Compliance from the Planning Department must be made at least 10 days before a Certificate of Occupancy or other final approval is requested.

General Conditions:

9. This approval includes a modification of the parking Lot Landscaping Standards of Section 10.10.7 B with the finding that the existing vegetation is sufficient to protect adjoining properties. No clear cutting of existing buffer vegetation may occur without the approval of the Commission.

10. This approval is for the specific use and improvements identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the improvements will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.

11. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.

12. All work associated with the construction of facilities as approved must be completed by July 12, 2012 or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission.

13. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.

14. The services of a professional engineer shall be retained by Hallmark during the construction period.

The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting.

Commissioner Cooper made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Weseliza, to waive the landscaping requirements for Hallmark Cards, Inc., SPR#1408. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Ladd voting.

c. SPR#1410 – Application for expansion of the parking lot at the Compass Building at the Lego Systems, Inc. complex at 555 Taylor Road, zoned I-1, Map 99, Lot 11, Lego Systems, Inc., Applicant/Owner. (Decision by 7/26/07 Meeting.)

d. SPR#1411 – Application for expansion of the parking lot at the GBS Building at the Lego Systems, Inc. Complex, 555 Taylor Road, zoned I-1, Map 99, Lot 11, Lego Systems, Inc., Applicant/Owner. (Decision by 7/26/07 Meeting.)

Tim Coon of J. R. Russo and Neil Deviasio of Lego Systems appeared before the Commission regarding this application.