|
|
ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 17, 2002
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Thursday, October 17, 2002, in the Town Council Chambers, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman James Howard called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: James Howard, Chairman
Anthony DiPace
Charles Duren
Robert Egan
James Hickey, Jr.
Karen Krebs
Nicles Lefakis
Karen Weseliza, Alternate
ALSO PRESENT: Jose Giner, Director of Planning
ABSENT: Jeffrey Cooper, Alternate
Joseph Jedynak, Alternate
CORRESPONDENCE
Commissioner Duren reported he received in the mail a packet of information pertaining to a company on King Street and including pictures. He submitted it to Mr. Giner in case this should come before the Commission. Chairman Howard stated he and Commissioner DiPace also received the same information. Mr. Giner stated it is a pending application and the information submitted will be made part of the record. The applicant will also be informed of the receipt of this material.
Commissioner Duren stated he received the APA Planning Magazine. There is also a notice of a CCAPA meeting on Managing the Crisis and Other Difficult Situations at the Yankee Silversmith Inn in Wallingford on Friday, October 25, 2002.
Chairman Howard reported he has Minutes from CRCOG along with Minutes from the Historic District Commission from September 25, 2002. Also received was a Zoning Board of Appeals Notice of Action for September 30, 2002 and an Inland Wetlands and Water Courses Notice of Action for October 1, 2002.
Mr. Giner reported he has reviewed previous minutes regarding the approval of the J. F. Kennedy modular units. He did not find anything that discussed where the mechanicals were supposed to be located. He will listen to the tapes to confirm this was not discussed. There were two approvals. One was April 1, 1999 and another in 2001. Mr. Giner noted there was a specific condition that approval was not given to the drawing of the schematic design and that the drawings submitted were to be used only for the location of the modular classrooms. Mr. Giner reported Mr. Bickley has sent a letter to Art Pongrantz noting that unscreened, the mechanicals still violate the regulations.
Commissioner DiPace asked if the modulars are temporary. Mr. Giner stated the Commission was told they would be used through the current space crunch. Mr. Giner noted there was a two-year approval on January 4, 2001. Commissioner DiPace stated if the mechanical units are not screened or relocated on the ground, in January the Commission would take this into consideration.
Mr. Giner stated there was concern about the Fermi signs and Mr. Bickley has sent out a letter. Mr. Alsbaugh is also still reviewing the many signs on the property and if they received approval.
Commissioner Egan noted receipt of a letter regarding Rich's Oil Service at 179 North Maple Street that indicated on September 10, 2002 a discussion would be held with the Town Planner regarding a site plan application. Mr. Giner reported he did meet with Mr. Tkacz. He has purchased property zoned Industrial located on Moody Road and will be coming before the Commission for a change of use. He would also need approval from the Inland Wetlands Commission. Mr. Tkacz is beginning this process to move his operation to the new location.
Mr. Giner reported he sent to Commission members a draft letter in response to REACT. Chairman Howard stated he will sign it and he expressed his satisfaction with the letter.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. PH#2231 - Application for a Special Use Permit for modification of plans previously approved to allow construction of a 7,234 square foot addition to the existing car dealership building at 20 Palomba Drive, zoned BR, Map 57, Lot 335, LIA Auto Group, Applicant/Owner.
Attorney Margaret Radigan, Dana Steele of J. R. Russo, the applicant's engineer, and Eric Forish of Forish Construction, Westfield, Massachusetts, appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Dana Steele presented a plan that was also presented at the last meeting. The plan shows the existing conditions of the site. A good portion of the area to the south of the existing building is all pavement with no islands. The entrance to the site has a somewhat unusual shape with a large island in the middle.
Commissioner Duren asked if the sign has been posted and he referred to a memo from Virginia Higley about the sign. Mr. Giner confirmed that it was posted and Mr. Bickley confirmed this. Mr. Forish stated upon receipt of the memo, they verified that and the sign was up.
Mr. Steele stated the purpose of this application is to convert the existing Nissan Pontiac dealership at 20 Palomba Drive to a Honda dealership. The Honda dealership will be moving from 10 Palomba Drive next door to the north.
Mr. Steele stated landscaped islands have been added to the interior of the large paved area to the south. The front entrance area has been made more uniform for easier traffic flow. The proposed sales area, including a canopy for the delivery of new vehicles, is being proposed as well as additional green space around the proposed building. The site is 4.76 acres located in a Business Regional zone. Mr. Steele noted this is a request for a Special Use Permit and under the town's regulations, there is a requirement to look at the public health, safety and general welfare, comfort and convenience of the public. One of the issues that was not addressed at the last meeting was the Fire Department's comments. Since that time, they have received written comments from the Fire Department dated October 7, 2002.
Mr. Steele stated in addition to addressing the issues of the Fire Department and providing improved traffic flow through the site and more landscaping for the site, they feel that this plan is conducive to the public health and safety. The Police Department has commented that they would like stop signs at the entrances and those are shown on the plans. The Special Use Permit requests that they consider the issue of whether the proposed development is in harmony with the neighborhood. Mr. Steele noted there are car dealerships on either side of the use.
Mr. Steele noted there were issues raised at the last meeting about the architectural style of the building and Mr. Forish will address that.
Mr. Steele reported on comments from Fire Chief Paul Censki. The first issue was regarding phasing of the project and how this site will continue to operate as a car dealership. Mr. Steele stated after talking to Mr. Forish, it was decided that a temporary office trailer would be located on the site east of the last set of islands. The specific location is shown on the revised set of plans.
Regarding the access through the site during construction, the way the phasing will proceed is first the building work will be done with the temporary trailer installed and once the building is completed, work will begin on the site portions. Traffic access to this facility will be maintained during that time. Mr. Censki has agreed this is a reasonable approach and it met his requirements.
Mr. Steele stated Mr. Censki made a comment about silt fencing and they agreed to locate the silt fencing along the sidewalk. It may not be necessary but it is shown on the plans to be located there to avoid any wash off on to the sidewalk.
Mr. Steele stated regarding the fire hydrant, Mr. Censki made a comment about the hydrant they were relocating due to shortening of an island. A note has now been added to the plan indicating that the hydrant, when it is exposed, will be inspected by the Fire Department to determine at that time if a new valve is required.
Mr. Steele stated the Fire Marshal requested that the plans show the building address of the site. They have a revised elevation plan showing the address of the site. It will be right on the front door in the glass above the main entrance.
Mr. Steele addressed the Fire Marshal's concern about the location of vehicles for unloading. He stated a note has been added indicating the location. Car carriers heading south on Palomba can pull into the area identified on the plans by Mr. Steele. He also noted the path for car carriers coming from the north.
Regarding fire lane markings, Mr. Censki was not clear about the type of markings or signage he would like but he suggested a note be added to the plan that markings will be provided as directed by the Fire Department. The reason for this comment is there is a hookup on the service building and the Fire Department would like proper access provided to that area.
Mr. Steele stated another issue not fully addressed at the last hearing session was the signage. The sign dimensions were submitted at the last meeting to Mr. Giner. In addition, that data was added to the plans showing that the sign dimensions meet the regulations.
Commissioner Egan asked if the Commission has received the revised plans referred to by Mr. Steele. Mr. Steele stated the plans have been revised to October 1, 2002 and the Commission should have that revision.
Commissioner Egan asked if the Commission will receive a letter from the Fire Marshal stating all his concerns have been addressed. Mr. Giner stated the comments have been received and one of the conditions is the Fire Marshal has to sign off on the application. Commissioner Egan would like something in writing from the Fire Marshal. Commissioner Egan also asked if the trailer would resolve the Fire Marshal's previous concerns. Mr. Giner stated the Fire Marshal had a concern as to how the project was going to be located so that if there is a fire, he would be able to access it.
Attorney Radigan stated some of the items the Fire Marshal requested will be handled during construction.
Commissioner Lefakis asked about the location of the fire hydrant. He had a concern that it may be located too close to the travel area. Mr. Steele stated he does not believe it is and the location is similar to the original plan. However, he would have no problem moving the hydrant further in if that is something the Commission would like to see. Commissioner Lefakis stated he was concerned about a truck carrier going over the curb and hitting the hydrant.
Attorney Radigan stated the hydrant has been in that location for some time without any problems. However, moving it in from where it is proposed is a safer location.
Mr. Forish stated in response to the question regarding safety throughout the construction operation, the first step would be the removal of the existing showroom. During that process, the sales operation will be temporarily relocated to the trailer. There are permanent facilities of customer service areas and bathrooms fully accessible in the existing service and parts building. This building is not being touched and all access, egress and safety requirements within that building will be maintained during the construction project. This showroom area has a little attached area that pulls it apart from the service area which makes the actual construction process simpler.
Mr. Forish stated the building will be removed and fencing will be around it during construction to prevent the general public from entering the construction area. There is a temporary trailer for sales and permanent facilities are operational in the rear building.
Commissioner Duren stated the Fire Marshal wanted to know where the cars shown in the front would be located during construction. Mr. Forish stated that will be a function of the dealer operation. They will have to conduct their inventory in a way to alleviate any traffic congestion and any construction activity that would affect travel throughout the site. Mr. Forish noted the current display area and the parking along both sides are being maintained and that is where the vehicles will be placed. The dealer would only be able to place the number of vehicles relating to the size available. Commissioner Duren asked if any vehicles would be in the front of the building. Mr. Forish stated the vehicles would be placed so that they will be outside of the construction activity in a safe environment for travel. Commissioner Duren stated that does not answer the question and his conclusion is the vehicles will be left in the front.
Attorney Radigan stated the Fire Marshal's concern is during the construction phase whether there will be access. What they can represent to the Commission is there will be access maintained at all times whether it is during construction of when construction is completed. The dealers will keep their inventory a little bit lower. Additionally, cars can be moved to the adjacent Honda area before the switch from Honda to Nissan is made.
Commissioner Duren stated he was unsure whether the Fire Marshal would prefer to see the vehicles entirely out of there so that he has a total access to the front.
Mr. Forish stated they are going to maintain an inventory of vehicles on the site. If the Fire Marshal does require them to remove the cars from the front of the building, they will cooperate in whatever way necessary with the Fire Marshal whether it is in relation to the fire lane or the display of product. Attorney Radigan confirmed they will abide by anything the Commission or the Fire Marshal would like. Mr. Forish noted that could be a condition of approval and they would be glad to cooperate with the Commission.
Mr. Forish stated one of the issues raised at the last meeting was the aesthetics of the building. He heard the towns of Simsbury and Avon mentioned and they did some homework. Mr. Forish presented some photos of car dealerships in both Simsbury and Avon. The first dealership is a Volvo brand, Mitchell in Simsbury. There is a photo of a dealer in Avon, O'Neil's. There is also Wagner in Simsbury. These are typical dealerships in communities Mr. Forish heard referenced at the last meeting.
Mr. Forish stated they did some research as far as what the Town of Enfield has permitted in the past through this Commission and its zoning regulations. He presented photos of sites limited to coming from I-91, driving down Elm Street and then turning on to Palomba which is the immediate area adjacent to where this current automobile dealership exists and where they propose their improvements. The first photo is McDonald's. Just down the street from McDonald's is a Mobil gas station which looks very new and shiny. Across the street from that is an Arby's Roast Beef. Adjacent to that is Wendy's. Down the street is Leslie's Pool Supply. On a side street, parallel to Palomba, is Levitz Furniture. Mr. Forish stated he is trying to address the comment that was made two weeks ago regarding their aesthetics. His comment to respond to the question raised is that their proposal is consistent in materials and aesthetic features of buildings within Enfield. The last photos are car dealerships on Palomba.
Commissioner DiPace stated the town has new regulations that were implemented in January of this year. Mr. Giner stated the design overlay zone is on Enfield Street.
Chairman Howard stated what Commissioner DiPace was referring to is that the present building had more New England characteristics. He mentioned Avon and Simsbury as perhaps getting a little better treatment. However, Chairman Howard noted the pictures presented are not where the Commission wants to go. Chairman Howard stated he personally understands that the Commission just approved the Volkswagen dealership and the Saturn dealership is across the street. However, the present approach is the wrong one. Mr. Forish apologized if that was the feeling the Commission got but that was not his intent. The intent was to address the comments.
Commissioner Egan stated the building proposed will be a better building than the circus planned for Elm Street with the Volkswagen dealership. In his opinion, this is great compared to the that dealership.
Mr. Forish stated this is the proposal before the Commission. They have described the appearance at the first public hearing session. The proposal before the Commission is a project that will enhance the site. The traffic flow will be improved through that site. The landscaping will be improved and, ultimately, the result will be a new Lia showroom facility for the community.
Commissioner Weseliza noted that no changes have been made since the last meeting. Mr. Forish confirmed nothing has been changed regarding the building appearance. Attorney Radigan stated this is the new Honda prototype building. The dealership is under constraints regarding any changes they can make to the design because it is a national program.
Chairman Howard asked about the size of the trailer on the site. Mr. Forish responded standard trailers are typically 10' x 40' and he envisions doubling the trailers on the site. Chairman Howard asked if there is any way to eliminate the trailer. He noted the next building is really quite close and they share parking lots right now.
Attorney Radigan stated while the trailers are on the site, there will be fewer cars. She does not think they can move the whole staff over and incorporate them into the existing facility next door. She also stated the estimated time for the trailers on the site is five months. Commissioner DiPace noted the license is for this parcel of property and they have to have the office on this property according to state law. Attorney Radigan stated they can move cars to the adjoining site.
Commissioner DiPace asked about the colors on the building and if the applicant has actual color samples. Mr. Forish stated they were submitted at the last meeting. He presented them again along with a photo of a completed Honda building with the blue and white colors.
Commissioner DiPace stated it was previously stated by the applicant that these are corporate colors. He added the Commission has been down this road before. Every company has these corporate colors but if you leave this area, these facilities use very different colors in other parts of the state or country. His concern is whether there are other options.
Attorney Radigan stated it depends on the year the business is opened and what a dealer is bound by in his agreement to operate. There is a significant amount of red tape to open an automobile dealership. Right now, this is the new building Honda wants nationwide. It could change in two years and it was probably different two years ago. If you look at some old Honda buildings, the big H was not as prominent as it is now. It is a corporate identity thing and they are bound right now to do the program that is out there. They have not been given any options as far as colors.
Mr. Forish stated they have options for the interior only and there are three different designs.
Commissioner Duren asked what arrangements have been made for the loading and unloading of vehicles while this site is under construction. Attorney Radigan assumed this will be kept to a minimum during construction. The space in the front around where the trailers are proposed will be back further so that the cars will be loaded on site in front of the building. Commissioner Duren questioned if there was sufficient clearance. Mr. Steele pointed out the trailer location and stated the aisle is 30'. Commissioner Duren questioned if the cars and trucks would be able to get in and out with the construction fencing and the parking of other vehicles.
Attorney Radigan stated the construction fencing will only be around the perimeter of the building. The fence will be inside the new proposed landscaped area.
Mr. Forish stated this issue was also raised with the Volkswagen dealership. At that time, they stated this proposal tonight would be coming before the Commission. They are trying to improve the entire area in order to get the car carriers off the road. This was a commitment requested by this Commission.
Commissioner Duren stated he realizes after it is done, this will be the case but his present concern is during construction.
Chairman Howard opened this hearing to the public. No one spoke in favor or against this application. Chairman Howard closed this public hearing.
No action was taken by the Commission pending receipt of a memo from the Fire Marshal.
b. PH#2341 - Application for a Special use Permit to allow an accessory coffee shop in an existing bicycle shop at 270 Enfield Street, zoned BL, Map 34, Lot 161, State Line Cycles, Owner/Applicant.
Chairman Howard read a letter from the applicant requesting that this hearing be continued to November 7, 2002. Chairman Howard opened this hearing to the public. No one spoke in favor or against this application.
Commissioner DiPace brought up the present purple and yellow colors of this building.
Commissioner Egan stated where this coffee shop is being proposed is in an area of many residential homes. Mr. Giner stated there is presently no requirement to notify abutters and the only requirement is to post a public hearing sign which has been done. Some discussion followed on the use of public hearing signs in lieu of notifying abutters, something also not required by state law.
Commissioner Duren stated the proposed coffee shop is to serve the bikers participating in group rides visiting the property. Mr. Giner stated this use was approved previously for their former location.
This public hearing was continued to November 7, 2002.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - NEW
PH #2344 - Application to modify the existing Special Use Permit to include the changes caused by a land taking by the Connecticut D.O.T. for roadway improvements on 76 Hazard Avenue, Zoned BL, Map 56, Lot 16, Exxon Mobil Corporation c/o Bohler Engineering, P.C. applicant/owner.
Attorney Peter Alter from Glastonbury, Connecticut, and Joshua Sterling from Bohler Engineering appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Attorney Alter stated this is an application to modify the existing special use permit with respect to the gasoline service station located at 76 Hazard Avenue. He stated the State of Connecticut Department of Transportation has control of Hazard Avenue, Connecticut State Highway Route 190. The DOT determined that it was appropriate to widen the existing eastbound lanes of Hazard Avenue from two lanes to three lanes immediately in front of this service station. In order to accomplish that, the State of Connecticut, using its authority of eminent domain, condemned about 3,900 square feet of the gas station property effectively moving their ownership line back to the area shown on the plan. There is a jog in the property line toward the westerly end of the property because that is the area where they have their existing concrete pad and tanks. The State of Connecticut did not want to be responsible for paying for the moving of those and the property line went around this area.
Attorney Alter stated there were several zoning issues that were caused by the taking. He noted up until eight or ten years ago, it was the State of Connecticut that was the applicant and came in and indicated to the Town authorities what the State had done and what was needed to resolve the issue. They no longer do that. They have shifted that burden back to the landowner to get the proper permits to remain zoning compliant. This is why they are here tonight. The gas station owner was perfectly happy with the station the way it was. The only changes made have been forced upon the owner by the State's taking.
Attorney Alter acknowledged there are some good improvements being made to the road system. He stated under current conditions there is a turning lane to go on to Palomba Drive and a through lane which can be confusing to motorists. On the opposite side of this intersection, there are two lanes going east and there are people who do not know what to do at this location. Under the State plan, both lanes will be through lanes and will line up with the lanes opposite. In addition, a sidewalk is being constructed along the southerly side of Hazard Avenue as shown on the plan. Attorney Alter noted there is a heavily worn walking path confirming this is an area of walkers and the sidewalk appears to be a good idea. The State did not continue the sidewalk down Middle Road. It will stop at this gas station.
Attorney Alter stated under the special use permit that was previously approved, their freestanding canopy which protects the motoring public was 54' from their previous property line to the front edge of the canopy. They have now had a condition imposed upon them and they are now about 36' from the property line. That falls within the jurisdiction of this Commission with respect to approval of that change in distance. They are requesting that the Commission approve the new distance of 36' from 54' as shown on the plans.
Attorney Alter stated there are no other changes being made to this station. The driveway cuts are back where they were before but are pushed back further than the original plan. There are no changes proposed to the site except what is shown on the plan as presented.
Commissioner DiPace requested a report regarding how many accidents have occurred in this area. Mr. Giner stated that was submitted to the Commission from Lieutenant Boula. Commissioner Duren stated from December 1, 2000 to October 16, 2002, there have been 38 accidents at this intersection. Commissioner DiPace stated a lot of the accidents have occurred in the west driveway. Motorists pull out of there, go to the left and are looking east. They don't pay attention and end up hitting someone head on going east bound. Commissioner Duren stated a lot of the accidents were caused by people following too close.
Commissioner Duren asked if the state is considering extending the barrier further down. Mr. Giner stated he does not believe they are. The staff did have a meeting with the State where that was discussed. The placing of the barrier was discussed but they had no plans to do so. The original plans also showed four lanes and in response to town concerns, the State agreed to reduce their plan for the intersection to show only three lanes. Mr. Giner acknowledged it is not an ideal layout for left hand turns. Lieutenant Boula maintains he still would like right hand turns in and out only.
Commissioner DiPace stated he has been told in the past that if this application ever comes before the Commission, that the driveway should be closed because of the many accidents. Attorney Alter stated the driveway design that is on this plan is the driveway design that the Connecticut DOT gave to the applicant. This is what the engineers for DOT designed as part of their taking when they exercised their right of eminent domain.
Commissioner DiPace asked if both driveways are currently there and Attorney Alter responded they are.
Mr. Sterling stated the Connecticut DOT did attend a couple of ART meetings with the applicant. There was interest as to what would happen at this intersection. One of the concessions that was made during the Connecticut DOT design was to eliminate one of the travel lanes. He noted going through the thirty-eight accidents listed in the report, a great number of those were the result of following too close or failure to grant right of way. He would hate to have all thirty-eight of those accidents be attributed to the applicant's driveway. Mr. Sterling did not believe a number of the accidents that occurred were the result of the configuration of their driveway.
Mr. Sterling stated he believes the realignment of the roadway will do a lot to address the Commission's concern about why people are making improper decisions at this location. Currently the two travel lanes that head west along Hazard Avenue split to a left only. He felt a good portion of the fail to grant right of way accidents are the result of people failing to recognize that they want to take a left on to Palomba and make an unsafe movement into that left turning lane. There is not adequate notification at this time that the movement needs to be made. Another source of confusion is once you are across the road, you go from a single through lane to two through lanes and the alignment is shifted causing confusion. Mr. Sterling noted the applicant no longer owns these accesses. The new property line that has been imposed by the DOT's taking is on their edge of pavement and does not include these driveways. These driveways were designed specifically by the Connecticut DOT. The DOT engineer present at the ART meeting stated there is no need to make these two driveways right in and right out only. They believe the design they had proposed was safe and adequate.
Mr. Sterling stated there are a couple of minor changes in addition to the property line being pushed back that are a part of the Commission's approval tonight. One is the realignment of the roadway causing the seven parking spaces to be altered so that they need to move two of them to an alternate location. The location of the tanks also have to be remotely located next to the canopy. The fills currently exist on top of the tanks. Under the proposed conditions, the fuel delivery will enter the second entrance on Hazard Avenue, circle around the building and stop adjacent to the canopy to fill the tanks remotely. Mr. Sterling stated they would much rather not have had to come before this Commission. They are not before the Commission for a change that the applicant is interested in. They are here to maintain their existing business. If they were here under different circumstances, Mr. Sterling felt it would present an opportunity to discuss improvement items. All they are trying to do is maintain the operation of their facility.
Commissioner DiPace stated the route of the gasoline truck is because the truck cannot park in the driveway now while he is unloading because he would risk getting hit by someone coming in. Mr. Sterling noted the driver would not be able to lawfully unload by entering the facility because his tanker truck would be sticking out beyond the property line, something not permitted.
Commissioner Egan stated some time ago there was a proposal to dig up and replace the tanks. He asked if that has been done. Mr. Sterling stated the proposal that was made was denied by the Inland Wetlands. It was a part of their remediation of the site to remove a substantial amount of petroleum impacted soil. Through the permitting process, the Inland Wetlands denied this application. Commissioner Egan stated he was on the Inland Wetlands at the time and they wanted the soil removed from the site rather than leaving it on the site and using existing technology to take care of the soil. Mr. Sterling stated the only excavation work required at this time is to do the piping for the tanks. That has gone before the Inland Wetlands Commission and has been approved as shown on page five of the plans.
Commissioner DiPace asked if Mr. Giner could contact the Traffic Safety Officer and request a map showing where the accidents have occurred in this area. He would like to know where the majority of the accidents have taken place.
Commissioner Hickey stated they have said that the State DOT provided this site plan. He asked how this was handled by the applicant. Mr. Sterling stated they received the electronic copy of the State's design with an overlay on to their site plan. Their survey does not show the property line of their facility. The requirements of a special use permit require that the site be completely surveyed. The State provided an overall plan showing the locations and design of the curb cuts of this facility. They took that information and included it in their site plan.
Mr. Giner stated there was a special request by the State to meet to discuss issues regarding the design. The design the State was proposing was four lanes and had the driveway blocked in front of the tanks at one point. There was some discussion as to whether the grade differential would provide an adequate ramp. The town asked why they were blocking that driveway and why four lanes were proposed. The town suggested removing one of the lanes.
Commissioner DiPace stated the problem is when you are coming out of the other driveway and cars are blocking it, motorists cannot see. They start edging out, someone in the right hand lane waves for the driver to go and a car comes along in the left hand lane and hits them.
Chairman Howard asked if there will be left hand turns as it was his understanding such turns would be right turn in and right turn out. Mr. Sterling noted that the Connecticut DOT in their design did not determine that it should be right in and right out only.
Commissioner DiPace asked about the Traffic Safety Officer's position in the meetings held with the State officials. Mr. Sterling stated he had indicated that he was going to maintain his position and that these driveways in his opinion should be right in and right out only with no left exit. The Traffic Safety Officer also understood their position was to maintain their existing access the way it has been since the facility has been there and also maintain it during the DOT taking process. Commissioner DiPace stated this Commission's job is to promote and maintain the health, safety and welfare of the community. If there is a driveway that poses a problem and affects the health, safety and welfare, then the Commission needs to take a serious look at it. Also, the Traffic Safety Officer does not make such recommendations lightly.
Attorney Alter stated they don't take the Traffic Safety Officer's concerns lightly but they would not expect that the State of Connecticut would make a design that is unsafe when presented to them. It was not the State's determination that the driveways should be right in and right out only. Attorney Alter understands the Commission's concerns and is respectful of the Traffic Safety Officer's position but all they want to do is maintain their status quo. This was not something they elected to do.
Chairman Howard asked if the traffic pattern of the driveways is a negotiable item. Mr. Sterling pointed out a couple of items that are concessions that have already been made. The first is the addition of the sidewalks and the reconfiguration/alignment of the roadway. Those do a lot to address the Commission's concerns regarding safety, health and welfare of the public. In addition to that, Mr. Sterling noted that people go to gasoline stations with three factors in mind. They are brand loyalty, price and convenience. The third item, convenience, means people will not drive out of their way to purchase gasoline. During the hours of peak trips on this roadway, people are not going to try to take a left out of this facility because it is impossible and/or inconvenient to do. During off peak hours, left hand turns may be convenient without it being an unsafe condition. Mr. Sterling did not believe the plan presented was worse than it is now and he felt it would be an improvement.
Commissioner Egan stated if they are really concerned about the health, safety and welfare of the people in this area of Enfield, they would clean up the contamination in the ground water. Secondly, it is not the matter of the convenience of taking a left but you cannot even get out on to Middle Road because of the traffic turning that corner. Also, in the Plan of Conservation and Development, there was an accident count and a map drawn up. There were 57 accidents during the period of time that this survey was taken. This was the second highest accident spot in the Town of Enfield. There is some serious concern and this Commission's job is to protect the safety of the people that use this station and that live in Enfield.
Attorney Alter responded that is why the Department of Transportation targeted this intersection for the improvements it is making. They want to reduce the number of accidents that occur there. The changes that the DOT proposes to make are in direct response to the kinds of traffic data and accident reports the Commission is citing. There is a need to create better gaps and that is what they are doing and that is why they condemned some of the applicant's property.
Commissioner Egan did not feel it improves the situation at the gas station at all and it may make it worse with the third lane going down Middle Road.
Attorney Alter stated the financial circumstances this puts his client in is of concern. The more changes that are made to this station, the more it will significantly affect the convenience of the motoring public in terms of using this station and the applicant's business will be affected. They are trying to maintain the business they have in spite of the changes made by the State.
Attorney Alter reported they did go to the Zoning Board of Appeals on September 30, 2002. They had some issues with regard to the signage which is now on state property and had to be moved back and there were some coverage issues. He presented a memo stating the result of that action. He noted those changes have been legally approved and variances granted on the basis of the hardship caused by the taking.
Chairman Howard opened this hearing to the audience. No one spoke in favor or against this application.
Mr. Giner stated there was a request from Commissioner DiPace for a map showing the accident locations. Commissioner DiPace stated he would like to know if the accidents occur at the intersection or at the exits of the driveways.
Mr. Sterling stated if there are specific items that the Commission would like from the applicant, he asked that they be stated. Chairman Howard stated he would like to see right in and right out at both driveways on Hazard Avenue. Attorney Alter suggested if the majority of the Commission feels that way and they are convinced of that position now no matter what an additional traffic report shows, that the Commission act tonight. He noted there seems to be no purpose in continuing and if that is what the Commission imposes on their client, they will take that back to the client and he will have to deal with that. Commissioner DiPace stated he would still like to see the report from the Traffic Safety Officer.
Commissioner Egan brought up the island on Middle Road and suggested that they request that the State make that a safer exit on to Middle Road. Attorney Alter stated it was his opinion those types of concerns would better come from the Director of Planning to the State than from them.
Commissioner Egan asked what will happen if the Commission denies this permit. Attorney Alter stated the State will go ahead and do their work and they will have a non-compliance gas station and the town will have to do something and the result will be litigation.
Attorney Alter stated they do not want to litigate with anyone. If this Commission feels that the only way to amend this special use permit is to impose a condition of right in and right out on the driveways, he asked that the Commission do what they must do. The Director of Planning can provide the reports the Commission members requested but that is not going to change the Commission's mind.
Some discussion followed on continuing this application to November 7, 2002.
Commissioner Weseliza asked if the receipt of the report from the Traffic Safety Officer is going to make a difference. Commissioner DiPace stated he would like to see where the accidents are occurring. He believes the majority of the accidents are coming from this site and he would like confirmation.
Mr. Sterling stated at this point it is the perception of the Commission that this condition needs to be imposed regarding right turns only. Whether or not their client agrees to this, it is going to be a condition imposed by this Commission. He respectfully requested that this information be submitted and incorporated into the file but that the Commission make their decision tonight. This would allow them to proceed to the next step to lawfully operate this facility.
Commissioner DiPace stated he was told by one of the traffic officers that if this application ever comes before the Commission, that driveway to the west needs to be closed and not just right turn in and out. He said it is dangerous and there are problems caused by this driveway. Commissioner DiPace would like to see the report.
Mr. Sterling noted the Traffic Safety Officer's email to the Commission. Mr. Giner confirmed that the Traffic Safety Officer did submit a written report saying the only way he would approve this is with a right turn in and right turn out. Attorney Alter read this email to Mr. Giner from Lieutenant Robert J. Boula for the Commission's information since it was not included in their meeting packet. His email stated that "no left turn signs from both driveways should be installed going from the Mobil station on to Hazard Avenue." He also noted that "no left turn signs should be installed going west on Hazard Avenue into the Mobil station."
Commissioner DiPace stated the Commission has to listen to the Traffic Safety Officer. He has also witnessed accidents at this site and towed cars involved in such accidents.
Commissioner Duren questioned how to handle preventing left turns in. Commissioner DiPace stated the Traffic Safety Officer will notify the state to post such signs and they can then be enforced.
Chairman Howard closed this public hearing.
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Duren, to approve PH#2344 with the following conditions:
Conditions to be met prior to signing of plans:
1. All plans submitted shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.
2. A schedule and description of responsibility for maintenance of the storm water system shall be on the mylars.
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. Two sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning and Community Development Department for signature of the Commission.
5. A pre-construction meeting between the applicant, site contractors, project engineer and Town staff shall be held.
6. The applicant shall post a bond for site improvements in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer and with surety acceptable to the Town Attorney.
7. A separate Erosion and Sediment Control Bond shall be submitted in the form of a passbook, pledged to the Town, in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer.
8. 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:
9. Complete as-built plans certified to Class A-2 accuracy shall be submitted prior to the issuance of any certificates of zoning compliance.
10. 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.
General Conditions
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. A building permit for the construction of facilities as approved must be obtained by (insert one year from approval date) or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission in accordance with Section 16-13 of the Enfield Zoning Regulations.
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.
15. The two driveways exiting on to Route 190 shall be right turn in and right turn out only, the state shall post signs for no left turn into those driveways and the pavement and signs shall be posted right turn only on the Mobil property. The applicant is required to notify the State Traffic Control people and the Police Department of this condition in their permit.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
c. PH #2345 - Application to amend zoning map to change zoning on 14.64 acre parcel on Mullen Road from Industrial (I-1) to R-33, westerly portion of Map 16, Lot 3, David Berto, Housing Enterprises, Inc., applicant, Carl and Kimberley Nowik, owners. (Must close by November 21)
David Berto with Housing Enterprises, Inc. from Suffield, Connecticut appeared before the Commission representing the owners, Carl and Kimberley Nowik. He stated the appropriate public hearing signs have been posted the required number of days.
Mr. Berto stated the application involved 14.64 acres of currently I-1 zoned land off Mullen Road just in from Route 5 and just north of the subdivision King Court at the south end of Enfield. The property is zoned I-1 and the request is to change the zone to R-33. The reason for the request is so that this land can be developed for a senior residential district in accordance with the town's regulations for a cluster senior housing development. There will be a second and independent application if this zone change is granted.
Mr. Berto stated presently surrounding this fourteen acres is a mix of residential and industrial land. As you go to the west, it is industrial. There is some industrial across the street. There is also some residential across the street. There is residential bordering this site on the Route 5 side. There is a residential subdivision along the south and additional residential across the street. There is always an issue when industrial and residential meet as far as an effective interface.
They are proposing to be allowed to develop a residential cluster development at this location as an effective bridge between standard residential development and higher industrial use. With the cluster development, it would allow for additional buffers between the industrial and residential. There is also a demand for senior age-restricted housing in the town. This development would allow the people of Enfield to have more choices in housing and stay in town as they get older. Senior housing will also provide a good tax base. This location is a good location in terms of access because of the proximity to the highway and retail areas.
Mr. Berto stated there was question about what type of design they might be anticipating for this senior residential development. They will do the design if the request for the change of zone is granted. Based on work that is being done in Connecticut by the same group of people, Mr. Berto provided examples of some of the types of houses that would be proposed. They would be single houses with garages and everything accessible. The particular layout would provide a nice traffic flow and an aesthetically pleasing layout which would be implemented at this location based on specific site constraints.
Commissioner DiPace stated by rezoning this property from Industrial to Residential, it will shift the burden of the 150' buffer. He asked if the applicant is aware of that and if he is willing to accept that buffer on the property that is the subject of this application. Mr. Berto stated they have discussed that. He understands there is a requirement that whenever you build industrial next to residential, that the industrial stays 150' away from the residential property line. The specific application that would follow the zone change would deal with that. He expected they would look at the uses of the industrial property and the ownership. He stated they will deal with this and it will be incorporated into the specific application for the site plan when it comes forward.
Commissioner DiPace stated this would be putting a burden on to someone else next door who doesn't currently have it regarding the buffer. Before he could consider doing that, Commissioner DiPace asked if the applicant would be willing to have the 150' buffer on their property. Mr. Berto stated if that is a requirement based on the specific industrial use here, yes they would. There may be some cluster designs that are in harmony with the current industrial use that he would like to pursue. However, if it is a requirement for a strict 150' buffer, they will abide by that.
Mr. Giner stated the buffer, according to the new regulations, would be a "D" buffer yard of 100'. One of the things that was added is that the Commission may modify the buffer yard standards where, in the opinion of the Commission, the adjoining land users are sufficiently protected.
Commissioner DiPace stated the town's master plan states that the Town of Enfield lacks a sufficient amount of industrial land and that more was needed. For the Commission to be taking industrial land and rezoning it to residential is defeating the intent of the Master Plan of Development.
Mr. Giner stated the Commission changed the zone along Post Road. The Lyons subdivision was rezoned from Industrial to R-33. Across the street, the old Mokrycki subdivision that was never built was also rezoned from I-1. Mr. Giner stated those tended to be areas not as suitable for industrial development due to wetlands or other natural topography. He added that the Mokrycki subdivision may have come in before the current master plan was adopted.
Commissioner Egan stated there was a lot of time put into the Plan of Conservation and Development to designate certain sites and make recommendations that industrial property and development be located at one end of the town far away from the residential area. That was the purpose of designating certain areas that would remain Industrial. This area was specifically targeted for industrial development. Commissioner Egan also thought that the Economic Development Director began working with the state to obtain state funding for a state industrial park there. However, it was denied by the State in the end because the town did not have control of that property. Commissioner Egan emphasized this area is designated as Industrial in the Plan of Conservation and Development, a plan put together with input from the total community. He would find it difficult to consider rezoning this property to residential.
Commissioner Duren stated this development abuts King Court and it may be better to have this senior residential development here than industry. It also abuts the houses on King Street itself. There is already light industry next door. The Commission has had proposals for this property in the past and the residents may feel this use is better. In Commissioner Duren's opinion, it gives the residents a better buffer than an industry at this location.
Commissioner Duren stated the property next door is industry but there is no guarantee that the same owner or industry is going to be there forever. He would like to see the applicant take control of the buffer because it is not the responsibility of the business that is there now and that business was not expecting this change. Mr. Berto stated they will adhere to whatever the buffer requirements imposed by the Commission are.
Commissioner Hickey asked about the adjacent industrial land and if this zone change is approved, would the adjacent property be designated nonconforming. Mr. Giner stated this has been handled in different ways in the past. On the Mokrycki property, the actual zone line was offset 100' off the property line. They came in for a zone change from Industrial to Residential. In order not to put the burden on the adjacent industrial land, the zone line did not coincide with the property line but was 100' off so that the buffer stayed on the residential property. In the Lyons parcel, they obtained a letter from the adjacent St. Patrick's Church stating they did not care regarding the buffer and they were able to go right up to the property line with the rezoning. Mr. Giner stated when the regulations changed, a section was added that if a property was adequately protected, the Commission could then modify the conditions of those buffers. Mr. Hickey stated there would be an impact to the industrial property owner from further development of his property based upon the adjacent zone. Mr. Giner confirmed that is correct and that is why the zone line has been offset by 100' from the property line in the past.
Mr. Berto stated at the time of the special use permit application, whatever buffer is deemed necessary to allow the industrial site to consider its development potential would be entered into their project as a permanent conservation easement into perpetuity.
Mr. Giner stated there is a 90' buffer on the southerly property line by a conservation easement. It would not impact the industrial land as much on the south as it would on the east. On the east side is the Wood Group that is currently under construction and just clearing their lot.
Commissioner Egan stated he does not think it improves the area by bringing more residents in and zoning this area Residential. He stated in this town there is too much industrial mixed in with residential and there is an impact. There will be an impact on the proposed residents as well as an impact on any proposed industrial development in the area. There is the potential for future liability by bringing in more residents as has happened around the town. Commissioner Egan disagreed with Commissioner Duren. He felt that bringing in more residents is not going to make it better but it is going to make it worse and it will compound the problem regarding further industrial development.
Commissioner DiPace asked if there are sewer lines on Mullen Road. Mr. Berto responded sewers exist to the top of the knoll. The current applicant for industrial is running a force main up to that manhole. They will generate a full set of sewer plans as part of their engineering for the development of this property. Regarding water, it is being brought up near the knoll so that fire protection will be provided by hoses to this new area of development. They would have to extend the water to the area of this application.
Mr. Giner stated the drinking water supply on the parcel being developed is by well. Any senior residential development has to have public water and sewer available to it to be able to be built. Such an application would require that full utilities be brought in.
Chairman Howard opened this public hearing to the public for their input.
David Arden from the Connecticut Wood Group and Rod Dimick who is also working on this project appeared before the Commission. Mr. Arden stated they have the parcel that the Commission has recently subdivided to the east of the main parcel and construction is underway. Currently under the setback buffer zones, if the burden of that buffer was moved on to their shoulders, their current building would be in non-compliance by seven feet. They cannot go any more to the east and the concrete has already been poured and the plans approved. Mr. Arden stated they would have no objection to this zone change as long as the burden of the buffer was shifted over to the proposed residential area. Mr. Arden did not feel that would affect their density because that area could be considered for their housing. In doing so, by shifting the burden of the buffer on to the proposed residential area, that would allow them the ability to at a later date develop the back land that is still available to them on the parcel. With the amount of square footage that is available, they probably have another 12,000 to 15,000 square feet of coverage they could use.
Mr. Dimick stated the water is currently on King Street and they are bringing it about half way or to the beginning of where the property that is the subject of this application is located.
Attorney Thomas Tyler, 92 High Street, stated he is speaking this evening on behalf of his wife, Marilyn, who owns the property due east of this parcel. The subject property as described by the applicant actually was inaccurately described because he said the abutter on the south was King Court. Attorney Tyler noted the abutter to the south is World Properties and Mr. Reale. The strip of land Mr. Reale has forms a perfect intersection with Route 5 and Old Depot. The reason Mr. Reale took that property is it gave him another access in to the 250 acres that he owns coming in off King Street.
Attorney Tyler stated his wife owns a thirty-two acre parcel due east of where the proposed zone change is. The thirty-two acres, along with Mr. Reale's property and this parcel, is targeted for the potential industrial park that Ray Warren has been working on with the property owners for the last five years or since the master plan was enacted. Attorney Tyler stated the property has been in his wife's family for about eighty years. Eddie Mokrycki was the prior owner and when his wife's Uncle Ed died, he left the property to Marilyn. It consisted of another parcel down the road of about sixty acres and that is also zoned Industrial. Attorney Tyler stated at the time they were trying to decide what to do with this property, they participated fully with the master plan committee and in the surveys taken in the development of that plan. Attorney Tyler understands there is very little industrial land left and that this is prime land in the town for industry and the only industrial zoned land in the town that does not have an underground aquifer problem. There are no underground aquifers in this area where the drinking water can be polluted.
Attorney Tyler stated in relying on the master plan, they have gone forward trying to get a use for this property that is consistent with the comprehensive master plan and compatible with his wife's family's desires to maintain an agricultural type atmosphere. They believe they have accomplished this at 70 Mullen Road which is now the home of Connecticut Mulch. Attorney Tyler stated that property is substantially improved with this use. He also recalls that during the application for this tree bark mulching operation, a lot of neighbors from King Court were upset because of the added traffic. Attorney Tyler stated they followed the advice of the Traffic Safety Officer and installed a courtesy stop sign along with a sign that says "no left hand turns" in order to avoid any traffic problems. They have tried to have the traffic not go through the highly residential area but to use Mullen Road.
Attorney Tyler stated if this property is rezoned to Residential, the Commission would be putting these people in harm's way because Mullen Road has to service industrial type vehicles. In addition, there is also the Reale parcel which is going to be a road at some point and it will service an industrial piece with industrial traffic. Attorney Tyler stated this will certainly not improve the quality of life for anyone who is going to be moving in there once industry does get established.
Attorney Tyler stated there is not only a limited supply of prime industrial land but there is also an abundance of properly zoned residential land that can be used for this type of a project without adversely affecting the comprehensive master plan.
Attorney Tyler suggested that the applicant might want to look at other residentially zoned land.
Attorney Tyler stated when the owner came before the Commission in July and applied for the subdivision to put in the wood working shop, they investigated and reviewed the applications. They also met with the engineer they had, Tim Coon from J. R. Russo. Attorney Tyler and his wife received from them a copy of the entire map and their drainage calculations and asked what will be done with the rest of that parcel. The response was it will be an industrial subdivision. Attorney Tyler stated they did not have a problem with an industrial use in an industrial zone. They thought it was the highest and best use of the property and consistent with the master plan and they did not voice any objections at the July 11 public hearing.
Attorney Tyler stated he did get a copy of the Minutes of that meeting where the Commission asked what are they going to do with the rest of the property after the wood working business is approved. They responded when it gets subdivided for other users, they will be back. Attorney Tyler noted the understanding was that it was an industrial zone. There was some discussion with Commissioner DiPace about open space and Mr. Giner informed the Commission about the differences in open space for an industrial development versus a residential development. On July 11, Attorney Tyler noted the Commission was under the same impression that they were and that is that the rest of that parcel was going to be industrial. On that basis, they did not object. If the Commission was going to change that parcel to an R-33, the Commission should have been told what their plans were because they did not state they were coming back next month to seek a change to Residential between their property and Marilyn Tyler's property. Attorney Tyler noted if they had said at that time that they were going to do residential, they might have considered a change to residential for their property as well. Attorney Tyler stated they have in good faith relied on applications and statements made by people and they ought to be held accountable to those statements.
Attorney Tyler submitted a copy of the Commission's Minutes from that July 11 meeting for further review by the Commission. He stated the appropriate section is page 5 of 20 of the Minutes of July 11, 2002 regarding Public Hearing #2314, application for a resubdivision to create a 4.12 acre parcel for industrial development off the initial parcel of 18.76 acres. The applicant owner is the same. Frank Boraski appeared before the Commission representing Glass Works. Mr. Boraski stated one issue is "the Engineering Department requested information about future development of the large parcel. The other parcel that is being split off is in front of the Commission as a separate application and Mr. Boraski stated they are not planning to do anything with the large parcel at this time. To create a large detention basin to handle proposed future maximum development of this parcel (which is industrial) would not be a good thing at this time because the parcel may be split into smaller parcels at a later date." In those minutes, Commissioner Duren made a notation as to some deficiencies in the map and Mr. Giner talked about open space and the fact that this parcel is industrial and it will be an industrial development later on. Attorney Tyler stated he would like to make these minutes part of the record for this public hearing.
Attorney Tyler noted only one of the owners has given permission to Mr. Berto to apply and he, therefore, is not sure if this application is procedurally sufficient. Also, the Commission has not been provided all the information. On the application it asks if there are any previous application file numbers and dates of decisions and this is left blank. Attorney Tyler stated they were just here in July. He did obtain a copy of the map that they had filed. It was prepared by one engineer in April and in July they were before the Commission with a different engineer telling the Commission they were only going to do industry. On July 23, they filed an amendment with the first engineer saying now they are going to come in and file their map for residential. He doesn't think they have been candid and Attorney Tyler stated he is not sure if the zone is changed that the Commission will get what they are telling the Commission about now. For the Commission to do this, Attorney Tyler stated it would create a spot zoning situation for the wood work shop in an area where they did not have to do this. To not be candid with the Commission presents a problem.
Attorney Tyler recalled his experience regarding this parcel of property in the past. They were originally going to have organic farming. The map discussed a gravel road going down to remove gravel at this location. Attorney Tyler stated there is no gravel there. Della Construction found there was no gravel and anyone who has tested found there was no gravel. Apparently, the owner subsequently found out there was no gravel either because they then abandoned their organic farming operation. Now they have come in with the wood work shop which Attorney Tyler did not have a problem with. It is an industrial use in an industrial zone. If the Commission allows a zone change here now under these circumstances with so much time and effort put forth, Attorney Tyler stated it would have a serious detrimental financial impact on his wife's use of her property just to the east of this parcel.
Attorney Tyler corrected one misstatement. When he was describing the Connecticut Mulch operation at 70 Mullen Road, he may have spoken incorrectly and stated the trucks can't go left. He meant to say that the trucks must go left coming out of Mullen Road so they avoid the residences that are to the east.
Brian Ellis, 7 King Court, stated King Court is by itself in the south end of town. He noted the Commissions' discussion about industrial land and stated he has not seen anything go on with the industrial land behind Stop & Shop and Shaw's. He was in favor of a plan to develop this area and to give residents that want to stay in the town a place to go. Mr. Ellis asked that the Commission take into consideration the loss of older residents because they have no place to go.
Mr. Ellis stated in talking about Mullen Road, they do not send the trailer trucks down the other end because Attorney Tyler went on record that the chipper used would be the size of one that you can get at Taylor Rental. It is a trailer truck. There are eighteen trailer trucks and they come out on to Route 5. Mr. Ellis acknowledged Commissioner DiPace's concerns regarding safety in the town. He stated the trailer trucks come off that hill and pull right on to Route 5.
Mr. Ellis felt the proposal will help the town's residents and be an asset to the area. He also suggested the town purchase the land from the Mokrycki's and build a baseball field for recreational use. He discussed other industrial space in the town and requested that the Commission make a positive decision on this application because it is something good for the Town of Enfield.
John Kelly, 12 King Court, stated he is in favor of the proposal to change the zone. He felt it will enhance the neighborhood. He has been in this neighborhood for twenty-three years and he is approaching an age where he might need such a retirement community. He felt the proposal will increase tax revenue, not affect the school system and be an asset to this part of Enfield.
Attorney Thomas Tyler acknowledged the comments made by Mr. Ellis and stated he has never lied to this Commission. He noted the issue is not wood chipping or bark chipping but the issue is whether or not this drastic change in the master plan is wise for the Town of Enfield. Attorney Tyler stated if the Commission decides to change this zone, the Commission has to get ready to change the rest of this industrial land to residential and let people get on with their lives. If that is the decision, Attorney Tyler stated they are okay with that decision. What they really have difficulty with is when they are playing by the rules, that someone comes in and tells the Commission he is doing one thing and he turns around and does something different. Attorney Tyler stated if the Commission wants to change the rules, they will be back right away and expect the same courtesy to change the rules on their property. And the Commission may as well change Mr. Reale's property also.
William Achey, 6 King Court, is in favor of this zone change to R-33. He is in full agreement with the comments made by Mr. Ellis. He thinks it is a great thing for Enfield's senior citizens to be able to have a safe haven in a beautiful location. He noted there are many people he knows that are starting to move out of this town and this would be beneficial to them. Mr. Achey stated the homes proposed would really beautify the area and he asked that the Commission consider changing the zone.
Commissioner Duren asked if the Commission has received any reaction from Ray Warren. Mr. Giner stated he has received no response from him.
David Berto, the applicant, stated he is appreciative of all the input. He is pleased the Connecticut Wood Group does not have a problem with this application as long as the buffer is set up in a way that does not affect them now or in the future. He reiterated that whatever buffering is required because of this application, will be accepted by the applicant as part of the next step with a site plan. Mr. Berto stated he has talked to Ray Warren and one concerns was the loss of industrial land. There was a question of valuable industrial land and not so valuable industrial land. Mr. Berto stated this is one of those that is on the fence because you have to have a buffer between industrial and residential. The way it is set up right now, as you start to use the remaining land for industrial, it is not the full land that you have available because you have to have this large buffer between the next industrial use and the current residential use. Mr. Berto stated the concept of a cluster subdivision, in his opinion, is an ideal buffer between the current residential area and the current industrial area. He does not view this as taking away significant industrial opportunities because they are still there but as providing an effective buffer between industrial and residential.
Mr. Berto stated this is not as much removing significant, valuable industrial land but shifting the buffer area by the size of this parcel. It would, in Mr. Berto's opinion, create a better neighborhood for the current residential areas along Route 5 and King Court.
Mr. Berto stated he did not mean to imply that King Court abuts the proposed property. He meant to say that King Court is located to the south but it clearly does not abut the property.
Mr. Berto stated the quality of life in this area will not be adversely affected by this proposal. There is safe road access.
Mr. Berto addressed the implications that previous applicants were not candid to the Commission and stated this plan came into effect after the previous application was made. The statements that were made previously were accurate as they were understood at the time.
Mr. Berto stated shifting the industrial buffer over while still maintaining an industrial buffer between the current industrial land and residential land should not adversely affect the remaining industrial land on Mullen Road. Mr. Berto does not believe this is a drastic change to the master plan. Industrial development is important and residential development for seniors is also important and becoming more so. It is also more readily developable from a tax base than something that may or may not occur at some point in the future.
Mr. Berto stated they are proposing this zone change and follow-up site plan because they do believe it will be good for the Town, for this neighborhood and for people in the town that want to stay in the town as they get older. Mr. Berto stated he is appreciative of the comments that see this as an enhancement to the neighborhood and asked that the Commission also consider it that way.
Commissioner Duren stated the previous application for farming included a large detention basin. Mr. Giner stated it was not a detention basin but a pond for irrigation. However, it certainly was the depth and excavation of such a basin.
Commissioner Duren questioned if this application should go to Inland Wetlands in the future. Mr. Giner stated when actual development is proposed, this may be necessary. He believes there was a swale proposed to the east of the Wood Group property.
Commissioner Hickey asked if Mr. Berto is a principal with Housing Enterprises, Inc. Mr. Berto stated he is the President of this organization. Commissioner Hickey noted the opinions expressed by Mr. Berto and asked him about his background and qualifications.
Mr. Berto stated he has been on the Planning and Zoning Commission in the Town of Suffield for many years. He was involved in and continues to be involved in the development of Suffield's master plan. His vocation is helping with housing development throughout the state and a lot of that is senior housing.
Commissioner Lefakis asked if the Commission considers a zone change for this parcel, the discussion is to retain the buffer on this piece of property along the east side which would be the right side on the map. He asked about the bottom. Mr. Giner stated it has a 90' conservation easement on which nothing can be built. Mr. Giner confirmed that if this parcel came in to be developed, it would be subject to the buffer or the Commission could waive the buffers according to Section 10.20c on page 85 of the regulations.
Commissioner DiPace asked how wide parcel 18 is. Mr. Giner stated it is 150' wide. Commissioner DiPace stated now if they wanted to make that the road, the buffer would have to be placed in where the residential is which is King Court. Mr. Giner stated if they want to put in a road, that would require a 100' requirement from King Street. On the other side they would have 150' and the math does not work.
Commissioner DiPace stated parcel 18 is World Properties LLC. He asked how much property they own in the back. Mr. Giner showed the property on the map and discussed the adjoining properties.
Mr. Giner quoted the regulations which state the Commission may require that a buffer yard be placed on any lot in a residential district when a special permit is being approved for such a lot abutting another lot in a residential district.
Mr. Berto added if there is any additional buffering required on the south side of the property, they would abide by that requirement.
Commissioner Egan stated there seems to be some perception of pushing industrial into this end of town. He felt that was a misnomer and he can attest to that because there is a significant amount of industrial development in other parts of this town. Secondly, Commissioner Egan felt there was a misperception that this Commission is against senior housing. This is also incorrect because this Commission recently approved an 80-unit senior housing development. In the past there was also a 45-unit development on North Maple Street approved.
Commissioner Egan stated the reason this site was chosen in the Plan of Conservation and Development for industrial was to minimize the commercial traffic through the residential areas. He discussed Brainard Road, Shaker Road, and the Hazard Avenue area where there are commercial trucks going through residential areas. This would minimize that and while some people might feel an impact, this Commission and the Steering Committee for the master plan were representing the entire town. The people who live on King Court had an opportunity during the development of the master plan to provide their input.
Chairman Howard continued this public hearing to November 7, 2002 and stated he would like to hear from Ray Warren.
PH 2346 - Application for a modification to an existing Special Permit to allow the construction of a sun room over an existing deck at 2 Woodbridge Drive (Abbewood Condominiums), Zoned R- 44, Map 92, Lot 120, Siding & Windows of CT, applicant; Juanetta R. Klucznik, unit owner, Abbewood Homeowner's Association, common interest owner.(Must close by November 21).
Alison from Siding and Windows of Connecticut, Chapel Road, South Windsor, appeared before the Commission representing Juanetta Klucznik, the applicant. She stated Abbewood was a development that had a special permit. There is an existing deck on the property. They are proposing to install an enclosed sunroom the exact size of the existing deck. The dimension would not change but the sunroom would be added.
Commissioner Duren stated the Commission allowed such an enclosure to one of the decks a little over a year ago so there is precedent for this. Also, he read the requirements from the Abbewood Homeowners Association and they are rather stringent. He asked that those be made conditions of approval for this application.
Chairman Howard asked for input from the audience.
Nancy Bennett, Abbewood Drive, President of the Abbewood Homeowners Association, spoke in favor of this application. She stated the addition would blend appropriately both with Ms. Klucznik's home and with the community. There were no objections at the recent meeting of the Association. The neighbors are aware of the improvement and have no objections.
Mr. Giner stated this does not affect any of the buffers or the setback areas that were approved as part of the Abbewood PRD.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner DiPace, to approve PH#2346, application for a modification to an existing Special Permit to allow the construction of a sunroom over an existing deck at 2 Woodbridge Drive (Abbewood Condominiums), zoned R-44, Map 92, Lot 120 with the following conditions:
1. The footprint for the addition is to be the same size as the current deck.
2. The roof line for the new room is to connect to the house similar to the current roof peaks; specifically, the ridge pole is to be perpendicular to the back roof tied in with valleys.
3. Roof shingles for the new structure are to match the existing roof shingles as closely as possible.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
PH #2348- Application for a Special Use Permit to construct a Veterans' World War II Monument on the Town Green, Zoned Thompsonville Village Center District, 820 Enfield Street, Map 28, Lot 113. Town of Enfield, applicant/owner. (Must close by November 21).
Theodore Plamondon, Jr., Chairman of the Enfield Veterans World War II Committee, and John D'Aleo, owner of Rogers Memorial Studio, appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Mr. D'Aleo stated they are before the Commission on behalf of the Town of Enfield. The Town Council voted to install a veteran's memorial on the town green. The Commission has received pictures of the memorial approved along with a map and footprint showing where the memorial would be located.
Commissioner Egan asked if there was any consideration given to expanding this memorial to include the Vietnam and Korean veterans. He felt it would be prudent when those memorials go up, that they might go in this area. He asked if any thought was given as to how those memorials would be arranged. Mr. Plamondon stated the Council's charge to them was to work on a World War II veterans' monument and apprise them of the location of the other memorials in the town. The Council brought up the other veterans and they told the Council they would consider installing monuments for such veterans in a different location. Mr. Plamondon stated the thought of many of the Council members was in the area where they are doing the construction on Elm Street and South Road, there will be a piece of land remaining that the state will own. They hope it will be turned over to the town allowing the town to do something later on for the other veterans possibly in this area or the Hazardville area.
Mr. Plamondon stated there will never be another veterans' monument for Enfield with 2,200 names on it unless the future changes that.
Commissioner Egan stated it would make sense that memorials to all the veterans should be in the same place. If World War II is on the green, Vietnam and the others should also be on the green. Chairman Howard agreed that he would like to see one memorial with all veterans.
Mr. D'Aleo confirmed that Town Manager Shanley instructed him that the only thing under consideration at this time was a memorial for World War II veterans.
Commissioner Duren asked to see the original plans for the Town Green as he would like to see the impact to the total area. Mr. Giner presented the Commission with the original plans for the Town Green dated July 1, 1985.
Mr. D'Aleo stated the Town Council hired an architectural firm, Malone and McBroom, to propose sites on the Town Green when the Town Council voted on this memorial. Mr. D'Aleo stated the memorial will be in the area where the bushes are. The memorial will be natural gray granite. The application is for the foundation and the memorial itself. There has been no lighting approved to date and they would come back in the future with plans for landscaping, walkways and lighting.
Chairman Howard asked if the proposed location is the same location that the Committee wanted. Mr. Plamondon stated it is the same one that they began with when this project was initiated.
Commissioner Duren asked if the trees and shrubs being removed would be replanted. Mr. D'Aleo stated those are proposed to be removed.
Chairman Howard opened this hearing to the public.
Ken Edgar, 16 Spruceland Road, stated he is a member of the Memorial Advisory Committee. He stated this is a memorial that was originally installed and was removed by the town in the early sixties. This will be a replacement of a big piece of Enfield's history. Every name that was on the original memorial will be on this one along with additional names that were missed. He spoke in favor of installing this memorial.
Brian Ellis, 7 King Court, spoke in favor of this memorial and asked that the Commission take positive action.
Mr. Giner confirmed the Commission is only approving the proposed monument and the location. Anything listed as "possible" on the site plan would have to come back to the Commission for approval.
Commissioner DiPace noted receipt of a memo from the Enfield Revitalization Committee. He noted their concern about not receiving information in a timely manner. Commissioner DiPace stated this Commission is under time constraints by state statute and Mr. Giner should inform the Enfield Revitalization Committee of this. Mr. Giner read the memo received from this Committee dated September 27, 2002. Mr. Giner stated in the future he will send the Enfield Revitalization Committee written material as soon as it is received regarding pending applications. Further discussion followed regarding how to address the concerns of the Enfield Revitalization Committee.
Chairman Howard closed this public hearing.
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Duren, to approve PH#2348, an application by the Town of Enfield for a Special Use Permit to construct a Veterans' World War II Monument on the Town Green, zoned Thompsonville Village Center District, 820 Enfield Street, Map 28, Lot 113. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to take items out of order. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote and the Commission heard SPR#1191 at this time.
OLD BUSINESS
Bond Releases
1. PH #2086 - Request for release of $3,200 Landscaping Bond for Bank of Boston ATM Kiosk at Stateline Plaza.
2. PH #2212 - Request for release of $8,270 Engineering Bond and $300 for Erosion/Sediment Control Bond for Savings Bank of Rockville ATM Kiosk at Scitico Plaza.
3. SPR #1119 - Request for release of $18,850 Engineering Bond for Connecticut Water Pumping Station on Brainard Road.
No action was taken on the above bond releases due to time constraints.
NEW BUSINESS
a. SPR #1191 - Application for a nail salon (beauty salon) at 933 Enfield
Street, Zoned R-33, Map 26, Lot 79, Chi Kim Le, applicant / Plus Life, Inc., owner.
Mr. Giner recommended the Commission condition this on conformance with the site plan that was approved showing fire lanes and parking.
Mr. Giner stated this application is in the design district and the Commission previously expressed concerns about signage in the windows. Commissioner Krebs stated she would not like to see any more neon lights.
Chi Kim Le, 15 Ganny Terrace, Enfield, appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Commissioner Krebs asked about the proposed signs and lighting for this business. Ms. Le stated she plans to use the existing sign but would also like lighting in the windows similar to other businesses in the area. Mr. Giner stated the regulations were changed in January regarding this design overlay district on Route 5. The Commission had concerns about lights in the windows and any subsequent applications are subject to these new regulations.
Some discussion followed led by Commissioner Krebs regarding the lighting in the windows. It was the consensus of the Commission during their discussion to address these concerns with conditions. Ms. Le noted the Chinese restaurant near her has such neon outlining of the window. The Commission instructed Mr. Giner to have the Zoning Enforcement Officer check on this.
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve SPR#1191 with the condition that the hours of operation are from 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. Also, signs are allowed in the windows but the signs shall be turned off at 7:00 p.m. Further, there shall be no neon outlining or framing of the window. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lefakis, to extend the meeting for twenty minutes. The motion was approved unanimously.
b. SPR # 1192 - Application for construction of 1,150 sq. ft. of atrium and open air concrete patio to an existing building at 110 Phoenix, Zoned I-1, Map 46, Lot 1, Retail Brand Alliance (RBA) applicant/owner.
Mr. Giner reported receipt of a memo from the Fire Marshal expressing no concerns and a memo from the Inland Wetlands Commission stating no permit is needed. This will be constructed over an existing concrete patio and the only new site work consists of some pump out grading for the fire road which will include grass pavers. Mr. Giner noted there will be a net decrease in total impervious area.
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve SPR#1192 with the following conditions:
Conditions to be met prior to signing of plans:
1. All plans submitted shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.
2. A schedule and description of responsibility for maintenance of the storm water system shall be on the mylars.
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. Two sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning and Community Development Department for signature of the Commission.
5. A pre-construction meeting between the applicant, site contractors, project engineer and Town staff shall be held.
6. The applicant shall post a bond for site improvements in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer and with surety acceptable to the Town Attorney.
7. A separate Erosion and Sediment Control Bond shall be submitted in the form of a passbook, pledged to the Town, in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer.
8. 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:
9. Complete as-built plans certified to Class A-2 accuracy shall be submitted prior to the issuance of any certificates of zoning compliance.
10. 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.
General Conditions
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. A building permit for the construction of facilities as approved must be obtained by October 17, 2002 or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission in accordance with Section 16-13 of the Enfield Zoning Regulations.
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.
c. SPR #1193 - Application for construction of a 10 ft. x 18 ft. and 38 ft. x 70 ft. addition at 148 Hazard Avenue, Zoned BP & R-44, Map 65, Lot 90, 86, 87, 88 & 89, All-Phase Enterprises, applicant / Johnson Memorial Corporation, owner.
Dana Steele with J. R. Russo and Associates and Al Seagrave from All-Phase Enterprises, appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Mr. Steele stated Johnson Memorial at 148 Hazard Avenue would like to add two additions on to building #1. The first addition is on the side of the building and will be used for a lunchroom. The larger addition of 38' x 70' is to be added on to the end of the building in an area that is existing lawn with a sidewalk. This addition would bring the building coverage for the site to the maximum of fifteen percent.
Mr. Steele stated there is sufficient parking to accommodation the additions. They sent notifications to the water company and Mr. Steele submitted notification cards for the record.
Mr. Steele reported John Cabbibo did have a comment regarding the sidewalks that are connecting to this building. He wanted the thickness of the ramps increased from six inches to eight inches.
Mr. Seagrave stated this is a new imaging center that they recently renovated. The trailer outside is for MRI's. The MRI's are being brought inside but there is a new technology call Pet Scan which will use the existing trailer.
Mr. Giner stated he received a memo today from the Fire Marshal stating he had no concerns.
Commissioner Lefakis asked if the architecture would be consistent with the existing facility. Mr. Seagrave stated it would.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve SPR#1193 with the following conditions:
Conditions to be met prior to signing of plans:
1. All plans submitted shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.
2. A schedule and description of responsibility for maintenance of the storm water system shall be on the mylars.
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. Two sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning and Community Development Department for signature of the Commission.
5. A pre-construction meeting between the applicant, site contractors, project engineer and Town staff shall be held.
6. The applicant shall post a bond for site improvements in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer and with surety acceptable to the Town Attorney.
7. A separate Erosion and Sediment Control Bond shall be submitted in the form of a passbook, pledged to the Town, in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer.
8. 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:
9. Complete as-built plans certified to Class A-2 accuracy shall be submitted prior to the issuance of any certificates of zoning compliance.
10. 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.
General Conditions
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. A building permit for the construction of facilities as approved must be obtained by October 17, ,2003 or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission in accordance with Section 16-13 of the Enfield Zoning Regulations.
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.
15. The sidewalks shall meet the Engineering Department requirements.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Commissioner DiPace left the meeting at 11:20 p.m.
d. SPR #1198 - Application to add gable and replace existing cupola and roof on bank building at 800 Enfield Street, Zoned BG, Map 29, Lot 2, Edward Polchlopek, Jr., applicant / Sovereign Bank, owner.
Edward Polchlopek, Jr. appeared before the Commission regarding this application. He stated the proposal is to add a membrane roof which has the appearance of a metal roof in a blue color. He presented samples of the roofing material. Commissioner Weseliza asked if this blue would be acceptable for this special design district area.
Mr. Polchlopek stated this year their plan is to do the roof, the gable and the change to the cupola.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve SPR#1198, the addition of a gable and replacement of an existing cupola and roof on bank building at 800 Enfield Street. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternate Weseliza voting.
Other Business
PH #2263 - Request for one year extension on Special Use Permit Approval.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve an extension of six months for PH#2263. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternate Weseliza voting.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Weseliza, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 11:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________
Karen Krebs, Secretary
Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission
|
|
Last Modified: 11/5/2004 3:53:18 AM
|
|
|