|
Please note that these minutes are subject to correction and final adoption by the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission
ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 21, 2002
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Thursday, February 21, 2002 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman 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
Jeffrey Cooper, Alternate
Joseph Jedynak, Alternate
Karen Weseliza, Alternate
ALSO PRESENT: José Giner, AICP, Director of Planning and Community Development
MINUTES
Commissioner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Duren, to approve the Minutes of February 7, 2002. The Minutes were approved by a 6 - 0 - 1 vote. Commissioner DiPace abstained.
CORRESPONDENCE
Chairman Howard brought up the March 21, 2002 dinner meeting of the Connecticut Federation of Planning and Zoning Commissions and asked who is planning to attend. Commissioners Egan, Lefakis, Duren, Hickey, Cooper, Jedynak, DiPace and Weseliza along with Chairman Howard planned to attend this meeting.
Chairman Howard asked if the Special Meeting time for Wednesday, February 27, 2002, can be changed to an earlier time. The consensus was to schedule this meeting at 6:30 p.m. and the meeting will begin with a half-hour Executive Session with the Town Attorney.
Chairman Howard brought up the letter prepared by Mr. Giner to the Mayor and Town Council requesting the return of municipal projects back to the jurisdiction of this Commission. Mr. Giner also included related correspondence on the history of this matter.
Commissioner DiPace stated it was his understanding that once the Town Council exempted themselves from municipal applications, until projects that are exempt are fully completed with c.o.'s issued, it is difficult for the Council to reverse those projects back to this Commission. If this Commission did not approve the project, he questioned how will the c.o. be issued at completion. Mr. Giner stated the Town Attorney is working on a proposal that will meet everyone's concerns. Chairman Howard emphasized that before this Commission takes back municipal projects, there will be a review from the attorneys. He would like this Commission to take back the municipal projects in a proper manner.
Chairman Howard announced that regarding Public Hearing #2295, the addiction recovery community house proposal at 143 Pearl Street, a letter was received at 4:30 p.m. today stating that they would not be making a presentation this evening. He stated this hearing will be open this evening for public input and the hearing will be continued to the March 7, 2002 meeting at 7:30 p.m.
Commissioner Duren brought up the letter received by the Commission from Town Attorney Christopher Bromson regarding the conditions that exist because of municipal highways that abut land to be subdivided that are not improved. There is an amendment going to the legislature. Commissioner Duren felt it would be proper for the Commission to read this amendment and vote to support it and send it on to the Town Council for their support. Mr. Giner stated he has not seen this proposed via a bill in the legislature. He elaborated on the schedule and stated he does not believe this bill has been submitted. Mr. Giner will check tomorrow and report back to the Commission. Some discussion followed on whether to make a recommendation now or wait until the bill comes up. Commissioner Egan suggested this discussion be continued under New Business later in the agenda. He also suggested Commission members contact their elected officials as soon as possible and let them know whether they are for or against it.
Commissioner Duren asked if the March 21, 2002 special meeting of the Commission has to be posted. Mr. Giner stated it will be posted, the meeting will be open and then Commission members will proceed to the dinner meeting.
Commissioner DiPace asked if Mr. Giner is still a liaison to the State legislature. Mr. Giner stated he is no longer in that position but he keeps in contact with the legislature. Commissioner DiPace asked about the possibility of getting a bill proposed regarding rescinding the legislation that allows towns to exempt themselves. Mr. Giner noted the upcoming session is a short session and will be limited to budgetary items. Commissioner DiPace noted the chaos that has been caused among the Town staff. He stated the legislature could decide to do something other than having the towns exempt themselves.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Continued from February 7, 2002 Meeting
a. PH#2283 - Application for a conversion from a two-family to a three-family residence with a loft at 1657 King Street, zoned R-33, Assessor's Map 16, Lot 50, Christine Clark, Applicant/Owner. (May be kept open until March 7, 2002.)
Christine Clark appeared before the Commission regarding this application. She stated she is the owner of the property at 1657 King Street and did not realize until this year when she upgraded the electric service that this property was not listed by the Town as a three-family home. The electrician came to the Town Hall to get a permit for this work and was stopped while doing the work because this property was listed by the Town as a one-family residence and not a multi-family home. Ms. Clark stated when she purchased this property twenty-five years ago, it was a three-family house with a loft apartment at the back of the house.
Commissioner Duren asked if Ms. Clark had the assessor's notification from the year that she purchased the home. Ms. Clark stated she does not have it. She went to the Town and was told they would have to get the document from the attic and she would have to come back. She did get the insurance records on the house confirming that it has been insured for twenty-five years as a multi-family residence. Scott Fay in Broad Brook was the insurance agent and insured the property and had the records from over twenty years ago. Five years ago, Ms. Clark changed insurance agencies and went to Nationwide. She purchased the property from her parents. There hasn't been any remodeling to the house other than upgrading the sheet rock and making cosmetic improvements such as new bathroom floors. There have been three kitchens in the house since Ms. Clark can remember.
Ms. Clark questioned why the property is assessed as a one-family house. Commissioner Duren asked if Ms. Clark has a deed description of the house. She stated she sent that to the Town Hall. The property is on two and a half acres of land. Ms. Clark stated when her parents originally bought the house they called it a multi-family boarding house. She noted the house has been in her family for some time.
Ms. Clark stated the home is an old farmhouse located across from the former Connecticut Light and Power Company on Enfield Street.
Mr. Cooper asked how the original insurance company determined the home was a three-family. Ms. Clark stated at the time she would guess they walked through the house. She noted she has a letter from the insurance agent confirming it was insured and what it was insured as.
Chairman Howard asked about tax records. Ms. Clark stated she paid her taxes with her mortgage and did not know that the Town did not consider this a multi-family home. She stated she would probably have never known had she not upgraded the electrical service.
Commissioner Egan asked if the other two units were ever leased. Ms. Clark stated her aunt lives downstairs and there are two other people that live in the other part of the house. She does not live at this location. There are three tenants in this home and it has been that way for many years. Commissioner Egan stated her insurance company may have records to show the home was leased out. Ms. Clark stated her insurance agent checked the records and presented to her what records he had. She also called the utility company and was told that she could not have any of the records without written permission from the people living at this house.
Mr. Cooper asked if the units are separately metered. Ms. Clark stated they are and at one time there were two meters. There are three separate gas meters and it has been like that for many years.
In response to questions from Commissioner DiPace, Ms. Clark described the specific location of this home.
Commissioner Duren noted there was a similar situation on Pearl Street and they did a fire department inspection and they had a record of it having been a multi-family home. Mr. Giner stated he talked to Fire Marshal Ed Shirley and he had no problem with this as long as he could inspect it under the old codes that were in effect at the time. Ms. Clark stated she owned the home for twenty-five years and her parents owned it for approximately ten years before that.
Mr. Giner asked if there is a mortgage on the property. Ms. Clark stated the home has been paid off.
Chairman Howard stated there are insurance records dating back twenty plus years. There is proof that someone paid extra for that long and he questioned if someone would pay extra for something they were not receiving. He asked if the Commission could have the town's building inspector review the property. Mr. Giner stated the applicant is requesting official action from this Commission to approve this use in this area. Ms. Clark is before the Commission because the Zoning Enforcement Officer did not have definitive proof for him to confirm it is a legal three-family home.
Commissioner DiPace stated a three-family home requires an inspection by the Fire Marshal. Mr. Giner confirmed that if this home is approved as a three-family, the Fire Marshal would have the authority to go in and inspect the home under the old codes. The regulations allow this type of use in the neighborhood unless there is a finding that such use is not compatible with the neighborhood. Mr. Giner stated the use has been occurring for at least thirty years without any complaints or enforcement action. He has no problem recommending approval of the use so that Ms. Clark can have an official record and receive her building permits.
Chairman Howard stated this hearing was continued pending receipt of the insurance papers. He opened this session to the public for their input.
Todd Turner, 132 Pearl Street, spoke in favor of this application. He stated it was his opinion after listening to Ms. Clark that her request does not seem unreasonable. She has not tried to deceive anyone and should be allowed the three-family house.
Chairman Howard closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve PH#2283, application for a conversion from a two-family to a three-family residence with a loft at 1657 King Street, zoned R-33 with the condition that it complies with all state and local fire and habitation code requirements. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
The reasons for approval are it is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and it has been a multi-family house based on testimony received.
a. PH #2294 - Application for a Special Permit under Section 4-3 (Change in Non-conforming Use) to allow an automobile sales display use with related site work on property Zoned BL, located at 515 Enfield Street, Assessor's Map 33, Lot 263, Artioli Dodge, applicant/owner. (May be kept open until March 21)
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to make the record of PH#2293 in total heard on February 7, 2002 part of the record of this hearing.
Attorney Tyler stated he is in agreement with having PH#2293 incorporated by reference in total from the beginning to the end from February 7, 2002 regarding 513 Enfield Street.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Attorney Tyler stated 515 Enfield Street is the parcel that actually abuts Artioli Dodge. The Commission heard previous testimony regarding 513 Enfield Street. Attorney Tyler stated on 513 Enfield Street, they did render a legal opinion to the owner with regard to the fence. It was their opinion that the owner does have the legal ability to take down the fence. It is Attorney Tyler's understanding the fence has been removed.
Dana Steele of J. R. Russo and Associates, 1 Shoham Road, East Windsor, responded to engineering concerns regarding 515 Enfield Street. He stated the application is for 515 Enfield Street referred to as Parcel A on the submitted plans. It is located to the south of Freemont Road and abuts the property of Artioli Dodge at 525 Enfield Street.
Mr. Steele stated a survey was done and at that time there was an existing building on the property and it has been removed. The property is located in a BL zone. They are before the Commission under Section 4.3 of the regulations because they have a property that is nonconforming. According to Section 4.3, if a proposed use or structure is more nearly conforming to the town's regulations and compatible with the abutting uses, the Commission may approve it.
Mr. Steele stated the issues which were nonconforming are in regard to impervious coverage. On Parcel A, the impervious coverage was 75.6% and it has been reduced to 75.0%. With regard to lot area, the lot area for Parcel A is slightly under 16,000 square feet or one-third of an acre and under the minimum requirement. Under their proposal, this lot will be combined with the Artioli Dodge parcel at 525 Enfield Street. Regarding building setbacks, there are no buildings presently on the property. Finally, with regard to access, Section 13-6.6 of the regulations allows a maximum width of 40' for a curb cut. Currently the property has a curb cut across the entire property. They would correct this and the proposed plan shows a grassed island area separating Freemont Road from the parcel. Parcel A will be combined with 525 Enfield Street and the area will be repaved. The property line will be eliminated and grass areas established. A drainage structure will be installed within the state right of way and tied into the state drainage system. This will require review and approval by the state DOT. They will pursue this as soon as they receive a decision from this Commission.
Mr. Steele stated they have made the access on Freemont Road more conforming. Regarding safety, they have significantly improved the overall intersection by eliminating curb cuts to Route 5. The congestion at the intersection will be reduced and they have comments from town staff agreeing that this is an improvement.
Commissioner Weseliza asked for confirmation that there will be no access from any part of this parcel to Enfield Street. Mr. Steele stated there is access on the Artioli Dodge parcel at 525 Enfield Street. Attorney Tyler confirmed that the only access points to Route 5 in the front of Parcel A or 513 Enfield Street are being eliminated. Mr. Steele stated 513 will utilize the two accesses at 525 Enfield Street.
Chairman Howard opened this hearing to the public.
Gene Robinson, 7 Freemont Road, an abutter, stated he is concerned about this dealership expansion. He and his wife bought their property approximately eight months ago. There has been quite a bit of light coming from this dealership into their home. Mr. Robinson's had a concern that the lights will remain on all night. He asked that there be a shut-off switch to avoid light from the dealership affecting his home. Mr. Robinson is also concerned about traffic and that Freemont Road will be used as a loading zone for the car dealership. He noted there are many children in the neighborhood and expressed a concern about the increased activity on Freemont Road. Another concern was if a buffer zone would be put up to avoid their seeing all the vehicles. They have owned their home for eight months and when they purchased this home, they never went to the home at night and were unaware that the lights stayed on throughout the night. He expressed a concern that with the additional lot, the lights will be affecting his home at every angle. He suggested a cut-off switch for the lights. He noted while they have down cast lights, they have two floodlights that shine right on his property.
Mr. Steele discussed the proposed lighting. He stated presently on the Artioli Dodge property there is lighting in four places and he pointed those out on the site plan. Those light poles have shoe box style light fixtures that shine down on to the Artioli Dodge parcel. The pole closest to the corner of the parcel is not going to be changed. The other three light poles will have light fixtures added to them. Those three fixtures are the only lighting that will be added. They did submit a photometric plan for staff review and they feel they have met the requirements of the regulations.
Commissioner DiPace asked if shields could be put on the lights affecting Mr. Robinson's property. Mr. Steele presented pictures of the existing lighting.
Commissioner DiPace asked if there will be any plantings on the grassed strip to the rear that abuts this property. Mr. Steele stated that area is shown as a grassed area but the applicant would be willing to meet any landscaping condition imposed by the Commission.
Attorney Tyler responded to Mr. Robinson's concern about the loading and unloading of vehicles on Freemont. The Traffic Safety Officer had requested that rather than load or unload vehicles on Enfield Street that they use Freemont for this purpose.
Chairman Howard requested that the two flood lights that flash back on Freemont be shielded or shut off because they affect the abutting property owner. Mr. Robinson, the abutter, noted that he is concerned with the trucks coming up and down Freemont. Freemont will now be a major access point and it is 100' from his house. He also requested some buffering to shield his property from this business.
Commissioner Krebs asked about the loading time for the vehicles. Bob Artioli from Artioli Dodge stated the trucks are usually there for approximately twenty minutes unloading vehicles and this could occur any time during the day or night.
Commissioner Jedynak asked if the trucks from this business would affect the school buses on Freemont. Mr. Artioli stated they have previously unloaded on Enfield Street until they were asked to use Freemont by the Traffic Safety Officer. It does not matter to Artioli Dodge where the cars are loaded or unloaded.
Attorney Tyler stated the Traffic Safety Officer has asked that loading and unloading not occur on Enfield Street. However, if the Commission would rather have the cars unloaded on Enfield Street in spite of the request from the Traffic Safety Officer, Artioli Dodge will do so. Attorney Tyler added that the Traffic Safety Officer would be the best person to take into account all activities occurring in this area of Enfield Street. They are mindful of everyone's interest in their property rights and are trying to do they best that they can to accommodate everyone. Attorney Tyler noted they are eliminating three curb cuts on to Enfield Street and are closing down a major area on one of these parcels where trucks and other vehicles could just go in and out. They are trying to make the area safer consistent with what the Traffic Safety Officer has recommended.
Mr. Artioli stated they also moved their front line of cars in front of their dealership back closer to the building so that people coming out of Freemont would be able to see more clearly.
Commissioner Weseliza asked how often these trucks come. Mr. Artioli stated it could be every day and it all depends on scheduling.
Commissioner DiPace stated he has seen cars being unloaded and it makes more sense to have this activity occur around the corner. He doesn't think the vehicles will go much further into the residential area and it makes sense to get this loading and unloading off of Route 5.
Chairman Howard stated while it makes sense, he would be concerned about the turn around of such truck traffic. Mr. Artioli stated they could be asked to back out into the street but this would require assistance. There is no real place to turn around.
Commissioner Egan asked if the applicant has agreed to do something with the spotlights in the front on telephone poles. Mr. Robinson stated these spotlights are on top of the telephone poles on Route 5 and they are angled. Only the two at the end affect his property. Commissioner Egan asked if the applicant would agree to adjust those lights so that they do not bother the abutter. Mr. Artioli agreed to do this.
Commissioner Egan asked if the applicant has agreed to install some plantings to block out the parking lot from the residential area. Mr. Artioli stated he would agree to this also.
Chairman Howard asked about the timing on the lights and if they stay on all night. Mr. Artioli stated the lights that are on the poles do stay on because they are on telephone poles and are not connected to the Artioli property. They cannot control those lights. The lights on their lot go off on timers. The ones they will add the down lights to go off at 10:00 p.m. or 11:00 p.m. but they have no control over the lights on the street.
Mr. Artioli stated the light the resident is concerned about is from CL&P. Chairman Howard would like to see if there is anything that can be done to help the abutting homeowner. Mr. Artioli felt they could point them in a different direction or install a shield. Chairman Howard suggested this be a condition of approval that such action be attempted.
Attorney Tyler stated to the extent it is humanly possible for his clients to change this lighting, they will do so.
Mr. Artioli asked what would be the access point for loading and unloading vehicles. Chairman Howard stated the Commission has to go with what is being recommended by Traffic Safety.
Attorney Tyler suggested to Mr. Robinson that he talk to Lieutenant Boula, the Traffic Safety Officer. Mr. Robinson stated he has already done so. Attorney Tyler noted that safety if the prime concern and Mr. Artioli will do whatever is requested.
Mr. Robinson stated he wants the lights adjusted. As far as the truck carriers, presently they come down and do the loop. It is a little loud when the truck comes by at 7:30 a.m. He noted it would be a good idea if the trucks could back out of Freemont. Mr. Artioli stated they could back out during the day but at 7:30 a.m. there would be no one to assist them in backing out on to Enfield Street. However, Mr. Artioli will request that the drivers back out and that deliveries be made at a different time.
Chairman Howard closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner DiPace, to approve PH#2294, application for a Special Permit under Section 4-3 (change in nonconforming use) to allow an automobile sales display use with related site work on property zoned BL, located at 515 Enfield Street, Assessor's Map 33, Lot 263, Artioli Dodge, Applicant/Owner. This application is subject to compliance with the referenced plans, as may be required to be modified, and the following conditions:
Conditions to be met prior to signing of mylars:
1. All mylars submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.
2. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns.
3. This approval will become effective upon the filing of a Special Use Zoning Certificate signed by the Commission Secretary on the Land Records by the owner of the property. Proof of such filing shall be in the file prior to the issuance of any permits.
4. The plans shall be revised to show a 1" lip along the driveway aprons along the edge of Freemont Road as requested by the Engineering Division.
5. Evidence of State DOT approval for the plans, as revised, shall be submitted to the Planning Department. Any major revisions required by the DOT may require re-approval of the plans by the Commission.
Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits or start of construction:
6. Two sets of final mylars, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted for signature to the Commission. One set of signed mylars shall be filed with the Town Clerk and one set shall be retained by the Planning Department.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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 Zoning Certificate of Compliance:
10. Complete as-built plans certified to Class A-2 accuracy shall be submitted prior to the issuance of any certificates of zoning compliance.
General Conditions:
11. No use of the property as approved herein shall occur without a Certificate of Zoning Compliance.
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. Special Use Permits are valid for a period of twelve months from the effective date of approval. Failure to secure a building permit or begin construction within twelve months of the effective date of approval shall render the Special Use Permit null and void. The Commission may grant an extension upon receipt of a written request from the applicant in accordance with Section 16-13 of the 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 applicant will contact CL&P for adjustments of lights on the poles that are affecting the neighbors.
16. Six feet tall arborvitae five feet on center to be planted along the residential property line.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
The reason for approval is the proposed improvements make the property more conforming, enhance public safety and improve the area.
b. PH#2295 - Application to operate an addiction recovery community house not operated for profit at 143 Pearl Street (formerly Rinaldi-Fede Post) at 143 Pearl Street, zoned R-33, Map 22, Lot 81, Enfield Sober Housing, Inc., applicant/36 Pleasant Street, LLC, Owner. (May be kept open until March 21, 2002.)
Chairman Howard noted receipt of a letter from Attorney Fahey, the applicant's attorney, that this application will not be presented this evening and requesting that this public hearing be continued to March 7, 2002.
Attorney Fahey stated one of the principal officers will not be back for another week and there are a few items on the site plan that Fire Marshal Censki wanted addressed. Those will be added to the site plan. Attorney Fahey understands there are people present this evening to speak and they have no objection to the Commission hearing their comments tonight. However, they do intend to make a full presentation at the Commission's next meeting.
Chairman Howard opened this hearing to the public. He noted anything stated by members of the public tonight will be part of the record and there will be no need for people to restate their comments on March 7.
Chris McNally, 25 New King Street, questioned if it would be in his interest to wait until March 7 to speak on this application. Chairman Howard stated anyone is welcome to speak this evening. He will open this hearing to the public for comments.
Sheila Reardon stated she is the owner of the home at 138 Pearl Street but her son lives at this location. She has some questions regarding this application. Their concerns are why is this use coming into this neighborhood. She stated this is a neighborhood that is approximately 300' from a library that has at least seventy-five to eighty percent walkers including children, mothers with babies and elderly. She does not feel this is the proper location for such a use. The property backs up to Garden Street which has a good number of people that probably have owned those homes for many years along with many renters with children. The back of their lot is easily accessible to the Alcorn School lot on Enfield Street.
Ms. Reardon stated this use was advertised as a sober house and now she sees it is to operate an addiction recovery community not operated for profit. While this is admirable, Ms. Reardon questioned why this use has to be located in Thompsonville. She asked if the people that will inhabit this home will be from Enfield and how long are they going to be there. Also, will they come directly from an addiction center? She noted 143 Pearl Street is approximately 1,000 feet from a liquor store down the street. Ms. Reardon stated the house they own at 138 Pearl Street they have owned for a little over two years. They bought this house and had it eleven days when a serious fire occurred on the property. The insurance company recommended the home be demolished but they chose to take the insurance money and spent above and beyond to restore this home. Ms. Reardon discussed the five or six homes in this area which have been improved and have revitalized the area. She stated she realizes these places are needed but she did not think they need it at this location. Ms. Reardon did not think it was fair to the residents that live across the street that are elderly and have lived in that duplex all their life or the people on Garden Street or King Street. She again questioned why this use is proposed for Thompsonville.
Ms. Reardon stated from what she understands, the community house will have someone to oversee it twenty-four hours a day. She asked who is this person, where will they come from. Do they have certification? Ms. Reardon discussed the improvements to the area in the vicinity of Diana's Bakery and stated this use is not something they want in this area.
Ms. Reardon questioned what happened to the liquor permit that went with this property at 143 Pearl Street. She also discussed a call her husband received which he returned upon returning to his office. He heard comments from Patrick Malloy who is connected to this group stating who do you think you are writing a letter and complaining about this sober house. There were also comments made that if this use is not approved, they will get a biker's club to locate at this location. Ms. Reardon considered this a threat that if this use is not approved, something will be put in this location that the people that have the bed and breakfast, the library, and the residents of the area won't like.
Ms. Reardon did not feel this sober house is compatible with the neighborhood. She noted the close proximity of St. Bernard's School. Also, most of the people in the area are walkers. She asked what is the rate of return for this addiction recovery community house and where the residents will come from. She also asked where the other uses in Enfield similar to this one are located and why are they kept a secret.
Ms. Reardon stated she does not live in Thompsonville but she lived in Enfield for twenty-seven years. Her children went to school here and it is a great town. She would like to keep it that way and keep Thompsonville improving and looking better. She is not in favor of the proposed use at this location.
Carl Russotto, 16 Bigelow Avenue, stated he had planned to reserve his comments until the next meeting but after listening to the previous speaker, he felt compelled to speak tonight. He stated the property in question is at 143 Pearl Street. His uncle, Joseph Russotto, lived at 144 Pearl Street for many years and owned a barber shop, a pool hall and a bowling alley in Enfield. He stated he is presently in recovery and has some experience in running a sober or addiction recovery house. From 1992-95, he ran the Lincoln Street halfway house for the House of Bread, a Catholic organization in Hartford. Mr. Russotto noted that he feels that anyone that is in a program of recovery is a hero or a person honestly embracing a recovery opportunity. He did not think there would be negative comments about this type of home if it was a cancer recovery house. In 1955, the American Medical Association termed addiction a disease. Mr. Russotto stated he is on the Board of Directors of Connecticut Community for Addiction Recovery and is active in this grass roots organization formed about four years ago. They deal with housing, transportation and services for recovering people. Mr. Russotto did not feel the previous speaker realizes there must be some success to this corporation because there are already two sober houses located in Enfield. They must be successful because there are no complaints about them.
Mr. Russotto stated he is a resident of old Thompsonville, and a former police officer in this town. He is also on the Board of Directors for a group in Windsor called the Recovery Club. He discussed specifics of the Thompsonville area and stated the two existing sober houses are on Asnuntuck and Pleasant Streets.
Mr. Russotto expressed his support for this addiction recovery community house. He is familiar with the principals involved in this house. He stated this town needs such places for people to learn how to live life on life's terms again. He asked that people in recovery not be stigmatized against and that they be given a chance. To allay fears of where these people are going to come from and who will run the house, someone very qualified will run this house. Regarding the liquor store down the street, Mr. Russotto stated if anyone goes into any of these houses smelling of alcohol, they are asked to leave instantaneously. He also questioned what will become of this home if a sober house is not located at this location.
Bonnie Clement, 148 Pearl Street, spoke in favor of this application as she has a lot of friends that are in recovery. However, as a mother she has concerns. Kathy Schwab, 150 Pearl Street, read some of Ms. Clement's questions due to her voice problems. She asked what type of addiction - drugs, alcohol or both. What types of drugs? Ms. Clement would like to know if it is a drug recovery center, how far along the residents are in treatment. If they are in a halfway house, they are safe. However, the concern is if it is a serious addiction and they do go off the wagon and are removed from the program, do the neighbors have to worry about their homes and people looking for drug money. She thinks the applicant really needs to explain the program and educate the residents of the area as to who is coming in, how far along they are in recovery, and are there criminal offenses involved as part of their addiction. If criminals are involved, Ms. Clement stated she has young daughters and she would like to know how are the residents monitored. Will there be people that are educated to handle this. She stated the company needs to explain this to the neighborhood.
Ms. Schwab read another question which was how can the owners of this center guarantee the safety of Alcorn students and surrounding residents and property. She is all for the program if residents are far along in the program and recovering but she would hate to see down the road a crime committed. She asked what types of precautions will be taken.
Chairman Howard stated the speaker's concerns cannot be answered this evening. Everything that was presented this evening will be on record.
Commissioner Cooper stated the Commission has a copy of this company's bylaws. He requested a copy of their mission statement for the next hearing session. Attorney Fahey stated that will be provided at the next meeting.
Commissioner Duren asked what state they are incorporated in and also the tax exempt information. Attorney Fahey stated at the next meeting, they will provide the Commission with a copy of the tax exempt status in the State of Connecticut for this newly formed corporation.
Commissioner Duren questioned whether this would be a situation where the applicants might meet with the neighborhood to go over the specifics of this application. Commissioner Lefakis felt this would be a good idea because the questions addressed by the neighbors could be addressed. An audience member had a concern if there is a question that sways the Commission's vote, the Commission members would not be present to hear such testimony.
Sheila Reardon, a previous speaker, asked with a nonprofit business, who pays the cost for the people in this facility. Is it governed by any particular group? Do any funds from this come from the town or the state or it is funded by a grant? Ms. Reardon would like this information. Ms. Reardon acknowledged that she sees addiction as a disease and this is a necessary thing but she questioned the area being targeted for this use. Also, if it is governed by certain monies, she felt the residents in the area should know about it. Where is the money coming from, who is providing it and at what expense. If these funds are available from the Town of Enfield for this type of a program, then people should know this.
Carl Russotto, 16 Bigelow Avenue, stated it has been his experience with halfway houses that most of them do not receive any federal, state or town funds. The house that was purchased at 143 Pearl Street was purchased with money from the people's pockets who presently own the house. No grant money was used. Regarding the not for profit basis that the house is operated under, each individual that goes into an addiction recovery house is asked to pay rent on a weekly rent. If they miss one week, they are asked to leave. They are asked to work in order to be self-sufficient and keep their places clean. The monies come from the people in recovery and they are taught to live a useful life.
Kevin Reardon, 138 Pearl Street, stated if residents do not pay their rent and are asked to leave, where do they go. They will be walking right out on the street. He noted these people are not the same as cancer patients or those with other medical conditions because many of these addiction recovery patients go back to it.
Commissioner Egan attempted to make a motion to continue this hearing, a process used by the previous commission he served on. Chairman Howard suggested that the Commission take a look at initiating this process for this Commission. Chairman Howard continued this public hearing to March 7, 2002 at 7:30 p.m.
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, for a recess. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission recessed at 9:00 p.m. The Commission reconvened at 9:20 p.m.
OLD BUSINESS
1. SPR#1129 - Request for a six-month extension from April 17, 2002 for the construction of a parking lot at 157 Moody Road, Turf Products Corp., Applicant/Owner.
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve a six-month extension from the April 17, 2002 approval for Turf Products Corp., SPR#1129. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
b. Bond Releases
1. PH#1947 - Request for release of Erosion and Sediment Bond for Phase I of Misty Meadow Subdivision.
Mr. Giner stated the town could end up using this bond to do whatever work is necessary regarding the drainage structures that were not completed. An opinion was received from the Town Attorney that the bond could be used for this purpose. Mr. Giner will obtain a list of items that need to be completed from the Town Engineer. The bond is approximately $3,500 and will not cover all the incomplete work.
No action was taken by the Commission.
2. PH#1947 - Request for release of Erosion and Sediment Bond in the amount of $4,600 for Section III of Misty Meadow Subdivision.
Mr. Giner stated this is a different phase and a different bond from the previous bond release request.
Commissioner Duren noted the town is waiting for a maintenance bond prior to release of this bond. No action was taken by the Commission.
3. PH#2209 - Request for release of Lego Engineering Bonds in the amounts of $26,180.00 and $559,260.00 to cover Moody Road warehouse and road improvements.
Mr. Giner stated at the last meeting there was some confusion as to what is being recommended. He stated they are recommending that the Commission release the main engineering bond. The Town Engineer had a concern with the erosion and sediment bond in the amount of $26,180 since there are still stock piles remaining on the site that require silt fencing.
Commissioner Duren stated the Commission usually receives a letter recommending release from the Town Engineer instead of the email submitted. The Commission does not have that for PH#2209. Commissioners noted the three-page email is confusing and they would like to see a letter recommending release.
Commissioner Lefakis noted in the letter from Mark Friend representing Lego there are three bond amounts mentioned and he only sees two being recommended for release. Mr. Friend notes an erosion control bond in the amount of $11,770.
Chairman Howard tabled release of these bonds until the Commission receives a clarification from Engineering.
4. PH#2084 - Request for release of Ashmead Commons Engineering Bond in the amount of $122,100.
Commissioner DiPace noted the correspondence on this application reflects that there are dumpster pads that have been installed but they are not in the same location as shown on the approved plan. They are also not screened.
Commissioner Duren stated the letter from this applicant's attorney states the town is satisfied and he cannot understand how the town is satisfied if they have not come to the Planning and Zoning Commission. He asked who is agreeing to items that have been approved by this Commission. Mr. Giner stated from an engineering point of view, Mr. Cabibbo stated he had no problems but he pointed out some issues regarding plan modifications. Commissioner Duren questioned why the applicant did not come back with the as-built requesting a change of location.
Chairman Howard stated if the plans reviewed by the Engineering Department are not what was approved, this applicant should come back for a modification. Mr. Giner will review the site and present the Commission with a list of changes to the approved plan.
NEW BUSINESS
a. Preliminary discussion on request for determination of suitability for a proposed active adult community (Section 10-1.3b) - Taylor Road, requested by Chet Ladd.
Chet Ladd appeared before the Commission to review a proposal they are planning for Taylor Road and to get some direction prior to coming in with a full application.
Sandy Aeschilman, the engineer on the project, from Glastonbury, Connecticut, also appeared before the Commission.
Mr. Aeschilman stated this parcel is on the southeast corner of Moody and Taylor right across from North Street or diagonally across from the Lego Day Care Center.
Mr. Ladd stated he is proposing an active adult community under the Commission's new guidelines. They are the builders of Abbewood and they feel there is a need for such housing. The difference in this proposal is there are seven conventional building lots right on Taylor Road. The active community will be up above that in the woods. Mr. Ladd stated they felt it was better to have the seven conventional lots on the road and have this project back for more privacy.
Commissioner Cooper asked what was used to make a determination that this type of project was needed. He noted usually when people are ready to retire, they do not want to take on another mortgage. Mr. Ladd noted in the last project they did similar to this one on Abbe Road, only about twenty-five percent of the people obtained mortgages. The balance paid cash.
Mr. Ladd stated the homes will be all single-level homes and he showed the proposed plans. He stated the prices would range in the $200,000's and the community would be run by an association.
Commissioner Duren stated this will require some engineering due to the amount of sheet water in the area. Mr. Ladd stated most of the project will be located in the woods and there is not that much runoff. They are planning on installing additional drainage on Taylor Road to pick up any additional water. It will go into the existing storm system on Taylor Road. Mr. Aeschilman added there will be a number of detention ponds on the site.
Mr. Aeschilman stated the proposal shows 77 homes. That figure may change a little bit once they get into the final design.
Commissioner Duren asked if the project will be done in phases. Mr. Ladd confirmed they will be phasing this project.
Mr. Aeschilman stated this project will be similar to Abbewood but a little bit bigger. There are the same types of houses and road patterns in this project. Commissioner Krebs complimented Mr. Ladd on the Abbewood development.
Mr. Ladd stated the regulations require a 30' wide street and to build a 30' wide road would mean covering dirt for not much reason. Commission members stated the revised subdivision regulations recently approved now state 26' wide.
Mr. Ladd stated they would be looking for sidewalks on one side of the road only or some type of combination due to the treed area that is buffering the homes. Also, there are no children in such projects and he doesn't know what the need would be for sidewalks on both sides of the road. Also, it would increase the cost of maintenance to the homeowner.
Mr. Giner stated the buyers for these homes have to be age 55 or over with documents for the association drawn up in advance.
Commissioner Duren stated the project includes cul de sacs and he asked if they have to meet the requirements on those. Mr. Giner stated they could easily open up another access on to Moody Road but he believes their preference is to have an emergency access drive if approved by the Fire Marshal.
Commissioner Duren stated the Commission recently changed cul de sacs to a different form in the new Subdivision Regulations. Commissioner Krebs noted these would be private roads.
Mr. Giner stated the only concern town staff had was whether it would require another road or not. Commissioner Duren felt the access looks good. Otherwise, the area will be used as a short cut. Mr. Ladd stated they tried to eliminate people coming from Somers trying to get to North Street cutting through this residential area.
Commissioner Egan asked if this project would be serviced by Hazardville Water. Mr. Ladd stated it would be. There will be all underground utilities with Hazardville Water, city gas, Northeast Utilities and SNET/Cox.
Mr. Ladd stated the requirement calls for open space and in the past what they have done is passive recreation. The older people do not want things that cost to maintain and, secondly, they do not use them. What they did is made a park area and included paths. There is plenty of room on the outside to the east and west for passive recreation.
Chairman Howard stated the proposal sounds good and the Commission looks forward to receipt of the full application.
b. SPR#1164 - Application to have office space, retail for wicker furniture and storage of prefab sunrooms and materials at 26 Pearl Street, zoned TV CZ, Map 24, Lot 84, Philip Scott, Applicant/Anthony Troiano & Sons, Partnership, Owner.
Mr. Giner stated they received a verbal comment that this applicant was removing all his applications. He stated it is necessary for the Commission to act on this application. He suggested a negative vote because this application does not meet the town requirements for an application. Mr. Giner briefly discussed the history of this application.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve SPR#1164, application to have office space, retail for wicker furniture and storage of prefab sunrooms and materials at 26 Pearl Street, zoned TV CZ, Philip Scott, Applicant/ Anthony Troiano & Sons, Partnership, Owner. The motion was denied by a 0 - 7 - 0 vote.
The reason for denial is due to the lack of input from the applicant.
OTHER BUSINESS
a. 8-24 Referral Request from the Town Council for recommendations on the proposed Family Resource Center at 110 High Street.
Dorothy Allen, Director of Social Services, appeared before the Commission regarding this item. The building they are proposing is where the graphics building was located. The town bought the property some time ago with a Small Cities Grant. There was also a grant from the State Bond Commission to renovate this building and later on it was decided that the building was not suitable and to go with new construction. The grant was held up for some time in Hartford and the town finally got it released. The town has added extra money to the grant money to complete the building construction.
Ms. Allen stated the building will be called the Alcorn Family Resource Center Annex. The family resource center itself has to be within a school and the only school that qualifies is Alcorn School. The building will house primarily day care which is a component of the family resource center which could not be located at the school because of lack of space. They plan to have twenty-four infant toddlers, twenty preschoolers and forty school age children at this location. They will be children from the Alcorn School district and they will be walking to the program.
Other kinds of activities will be preschool, birth to three, and parent education.
Peter Wills, the architect for the project, stated he is present to respond to Commission questions.
Commissioner DiPace asked if there are any changes to the plans from those presented a month ago. Mr. Wills stated no but they have two versions. The site plan itself remains the same. The two versions are included because there is a question whether they can use the level that is incorporated into the roof space as usable space. It doesn't affect the footprint of the building.
Mr. Giner stated there is a Plan A and Plan B and he submitted those to the Commission. There is a one-story proposal and a two-story proposal. Chairman Howard stated representatives of the Council are also present to respond to questions.
Mr. Wills stated the Commission may have seen previously the two-story version with a rectangular screen. They have reexamined that and continued the roof space and there will be a well behind this roof to house the mechanical equipment.
Councilman Lewis Fiore, Chairman of the Council Subcommittee that reviewed these plans, appeared before the Commission representing the Enfield Town Council. They had a public information about a month ago. The plans were reviewed and Town Council questions were answered.
Commissioner Duren stated he has some concerns. On the plans, gates are shown on the east and west side of the building and there are exits from the building. The concern would be those fences that are blocking the back driveway. With the gates there and the fire exit, Commissioner Duren questioned the safety of the occupants of the building. Mr. Wills stated the exiting from the building is in accordance with town codes. He pointed out the gates and stated it is necessary for them to have a fence all the way around because it is a daycare use. Commissioner Duren questioned if there is an emergency, how will the people get out on to High Street and away from the building with these gates in place. Mr. Wills stated the gates are controlled by how many children under the age of two are in the area. All the children would be under the control of adults and in the event of a fire, they would exit the building in many locations. The gates can be operated by adults but not by children. Mr. Wills stated this is common procedure in a daycare center. The gates have security latches on them which are controlled by adults.
Commissioner Duren stated one of the Council members had asked questions about the west side of the building since by that same gate, there is a dumpster. This dumpster location was a concern to at least one Councilman. Mr. Wills pointed out how far the children can go and the screened area that prevents access to the dumpster. Commissioner Duren stated the children could still get out by the adult-operated gate. He also asked if the driver would have sufficient room to turn around. Mr. Wills stated he does by coming in from the front and backing out.
Commissioner Egan stated in reviewing the meeting of the Town Council Subcommittee, there were several issues that were raised and he did not see any of those issues being addressed or resolved. The ones that concern Commissioner Egan the most would be the fire safety and ambulance access to the back of the property. He understands there was some discussion on that and the fire department said they couldn't get their fire trucks back there. The plan was to put in sprinklers to give them more time to get back there. Commissioner Egan stated there will be the playground in the back and if anyone is hurt, an ambulance would need to access the back. He felt not having access to the back of this building is a concern.
Mr. Wills stated a few days ago Mr. Kazmarski from the town called him on the same subject and asked if they could incorporate an emergency driveway that the children can play on. They would either do that or take the sidewalk that circles the building and make that wide enough for a small vehicle to drive on. Mr. Wills added that normally in daycare centers, they expect the ambulance to pull up at the front door and whoever is hurt is brought to the front door and put in the ambulance. However, there is no reason why they can't have an emergency driveway around the side of the building and still have it useable as a play area. That has not yet been included on the plans but it will be added.
Commissioner Egan brought up the environmental issues. There are some oil tanks and also the former use was a printing operation. Commissioner Egan stated this may have been covered by Phase I but this Commission does not have that information. Mr. Wills stated it is not part of their charge to deal with the hazardous materials. He was asked to solicit bids from three environmental engineers to the town so that they could have a survey done with samples and some specifications written so that when the demolition goes ahead, all those concerns can be handled. Mr. Wills stated it is his understanding that Public Works has engaged an environmental engineer to take samples and report on the site. Mr. Wills stated the engineer will be a licensed professional engineer who will be required to report to the DOT if they find anything. Councilman Fiore confirmed that is the intent. The intent is that based on whatever environmental report comes back, this land will be corrected. Also, the tank and any hazardous material must be removed.
Commissioner Egan asked if there are any leaks, would that change the plans as far as the pavement since in order to use the property, it may be necessary to pave over the area versus using the grass for the play area. Mr. Wills stated if that situation arose, that would be the case. Mr. Wills stated the same engineer who did the Phase I report is continuing on. As he understands, the records as far as the old storage tanks suggest there have been no leaks over the years. However, soil tests around the tank will be taken.
Commissioner Egan brought up the drainage concerns. He asked for an explanation of storm water galleys. Mr. Wills stated they are chambers which hold storm water and release the water into the ground. He noted this is standard engineering practice.
Commissioner Egan asked if the neighbors have commented about the facility or the drainage issues. Mr. Wills stated the only comments received at the information meeting were favorable. Councilman Fiore stated the abutters have been contacted by a mailing and in some cases in person. He also confirmed there have been no negative comments received.
Commissioner Egan stated there is a requirement when such a project comes before the Planning and Zoning Commission that there be some contact with the Enfield Revitalization Committee. He asked if the Council has approached that Committee and received any feedback. Both Councilman Fiore and Ms. Allen did not believe this Committee has been contacted. Ms. Allen added that the Enfield Revitalization Committee purchased the land initially and she is sure they are aware of this project. However, they will contact that Committee.
Commissioner Egan stated this Commission does not have jurisdiction over this project. This 8-24 is only to make recommendations and this Commission does not have the jurisdiction to approve or disapprove.
Commissioner Lefakis asked if the structure proposed will have a hip roof. Mr. Wills stated it is a hip roof with a well to conceal the rooftop units. Commissioner Lefakis stated this program is going to be part of Alcorn School and he questioned why this building was not located on that property. Ms. Allen stated she is not employed by the schools and wrote the grant as part of the Social Services Department. The Family Resource Center Grant is also a town grant. The requirements are that the program has to be in a severe needs school and Alcorn is the only school in Enfield that qualifies. Because Ms. Allen wrote the grant and they were able through the Small Cities Grant to acquire the property, this is why it is at this location. They have tried to locate it as close as possible to Alcorn School. Locating it at the school property would require the proposal to go through a different group of people.
Commissioner DiPace stated this program will help the children and what is proposed is much better than what is there. He added it is up to the Town Council to work out the details of this application.
Chairman Howard stated he is sorry that this Commission doesn't have more to say and offer. As far as the rooftop units, he is glad they will be located in a well and not visible. He brought up fire safety requirements and building color and stated he would like to see everything uniform throughout the town.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner DiPace, to send an approval recommendation to the Town Council for the Family Resource Center at 110 High Street.
Commissioner Egan stated he will vote against this recommendation because there are at least thirteen different items that have not been resolved. Some are major issues like fire safety. There are drainage issues, a fence issue among the neighbors that has not been resolved, there has been no final plan presented, there has been no discussion about signage, and they are not in compliance with the zoning regulations on parking spaces. Until these items are addressed, Commissioner Egan would have to vote against a favorable recommendation. He does think it is a worthwhile project but there is a process that has to be followed and this process is being circumvented leaving a lot of open issues that need to be addressed.
The motion was approved by a 5 - 1 - 1 vote. Commissioner Egan voted nay. Commissioner Lefakis abstained.
Following a brief discussion, Commissioner Lefakis made a motion, seconded by Commissioner DiPace, that the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission endorse the proposed statutory amendment to the Connecticut General Statutes, Section 8-25, and that a letter be sent to the town's state representatives and the Town Council. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Commissioner DiPace requested a legal opinion, with a copy sent to the Town Council, on whether it is appropriate for Town Council members to be handing out Commission members' names and addresses and telling members of the public to call these members regarding specific applications.
Commissioner Lefakis brought up buildings in town that have been very successfully renovated such as the house on Pearl Street that was mentioned earlier this evening and the building across from the firehouse. He suggested a job well done citation be presented to such property owners from the town and would like to see such a program initiated.
Commissioner Lefakis would like to see a survey of the unimproved roads in Enfield and that the Commission take a look at the zoning on these unimproved roads and perhaps do something to increase the minimum lot size. Commissioner Lefakis stated if there was a four or eight acre requirement on such unimproved roads, it would solve some future problems. Mr. Giner will check with the Engineering Department to see if they have a list of such roads.
Chairman Howard requested that responses to Commission questions be included in each Commission members' next meeting packet.
The following applications were received by the Commission:
PH#2299 - Application for zone change from I-1 to R-33 at 9 Manning Road, zoned I-1, Map 34, Lot 9, David S. Flasinski, Applicant/Owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled for April 4, 2002.
SPR#1170 - Application for modification of plans previously approved for construction of approximately 23,000 square feet mezzanine floor within the distribution facility at 107 Phoenix Avenue, zoned I-1, Map 46, Lot 29, Casual Corner Group, Inc., Applicant/Owner.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Weseliza, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Karen Krebs, Secretary
Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission
jmr
|