|
ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 17, 2002
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Thursday, January 17, 2002 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman Howard called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
PRESENT: James Howard, Chairman
Charles Duren
Karen Krebs
Anthony DiPace
Robert Egan
Nicles Lefakis
James Hickey, Jr.
Karen Weseliza, Alternate
Jeffrey Cooper, Alternate
ABSENT: Joseph Jednak, Alternate
ALSO PRESENT: Jose Giner, Director of Planning
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to go into Executive Session to discuss pending litigation. The motion was approved unanimously and the Commission went into Executive Session at 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Weseliza, to return to the Regular Meeting. Following a unanimous vote, Executive Session ended at 7:45 p.m. Chairman Howard noted there were no votes taken or decisions made during this Executive Session.
MINUTES
Commissioner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Duren, to approve the Minutes of November 29, 2001. Corrections were made as follows: Anthony DiPace should be listed as present; and the sentence on page one stating Commission Duren abstained should be eliminated as he did not participate. The Minutes, as amended, were approved by a 5 - 0 - 2 vote. Commissioners Egan and Hickey abstained.
Commissioner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Duren, to approve the Minutes of December 6, 2001. Corrections were made as follows: Commissioner Duren was not present at this meeting and is listed as attending; Commissioner DiPace was present and should be included in the list of those present. The Minutes, as amended, were approved by a 5 - 0 - 2 vote. Commissioner Egan and Commissioner Hickey abstained.
Commissioner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Weseliza, to approve the Minutes of January 3, 2002. Commissioner DiPace corrected two votes on pages one and two. They should read 6 - 1 - 0 rather than 6 - 0 - 1. The Minutes, as amended, were approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
CORRESPONDENCE
Commissioner Duren asked about the material from the State Department of Environmental Protection and what are they dredging. He asked if this was applicable to Enfield or if it was just general. Mr. Giner stated it is general information stating that anyone applying for those types of permits has to follow specific procedures.
Chairman Howard asked if the addresses and phone numbers of Commission members as printed by the Planning Office need updating, that Commissioners contact Mr. Giner.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PH#2290 - Application for a Special Use Permit under Section 3-5.1 to unmerge lots of record for the purpose of creating a new building lot on land zoned R-33 located at 152-156 Kalish Avenue (Maps 34 and 35, Lot #208), Josephine Buttacavoli, Applicant/Owner.
Attorney David Markowicz of Bloomfield, Connecticut, appeared before the Commission representing the applicant. He noted this hearing was continued from December 20, 2001 and he was not present at that initial hearing.
Attorney Markowicz stated this is an application by Josephine Buttacavoli to umerge some lots. The subject property at 40 Kalish Avenue consists of five lots technically merged with five abutting lots that front on Bernardino Avenue known as #10. The Bernardino lots and the house constructed on that property were conveyed by Mrs. Buttacavoli to the present owner on September 30, 1997. She acquired the ten lots in 1947 when the conveyance was done and there was no recognition that there had been a merger. Both 40 Kalish Avenue and the Bernardino property have been assessed as lots by the Town of Enfield. Attorney Markowicz stated he also has copies of the Assessor's street cards available to the Commission.
Attorney Markowicz stated he understands that Lori Longhi presented some documents to the Commission previously. One is a copy of the original subdivision map for this neighborhood. There was also a copy of the portion of the Assessor's map relevant to this neighborhood and there is a neighborhood analysis.
Attorney Markowicz referred to the neighborhood analysis and stated the applicant is required to demonstrate that the lot that is created as a result of the unmerging is consistent with the neighborhood. The proposed lot will have 125' of frontage on Kalish Avenue. The neighborhood median is 91.1'. The proposed lot will contain 12,500 square feet of area. The neighborhood average is 8,247 square feet. The unmerged lot will have approximately thirty-one percent more frontage than the average lot in the neighborhood and sixty-three percent more square footage than the average lot in the neighborhood.
In deciding to unmerge, Attorney Markowicz referred to Section 3-5.1g including six items. The first is that the lot shall equal or exceed the median lot size of the neighborhood and must contain more than 5,000 square feet and have at least 50' of frontage. As the neighborhood analysis demonstrates, this lot meets those requirements.
Attorney Markowicz stated it is also required that the lot shall adhere to the applicable requirements for height, setback, lot coverage, and floor area. He noted the site plan for the lot that has been submitted demonstrates that this property does comply.
Attorney Markowicz stated another requirement is the lot must be compatible with the neighborhood. The analysis demonstrates that and the plan for the home to be constructed also demonstrates compatibility.
Attorney Markowicz stated the unmerged lot must not adversely affect traffic patterns or storm water runoff. He stated this is going to be a relatively small raised ranch and will generate a maximum of two cars peak in the morning and afternoon. The Commission has received a letter from their engineer, Gerald Hardisty, regarding storm water management and runoff along with an email from the Assistant Town Engineer with his latest comments. These two statements adequately demonstrate that there is no problem with storm water management or runoff with regard to this lot.
Attorney Markowicz stated the Town Engineer requested a seal from their engineer regarding the drainage calculations and he presented that to the Commission for the file.
Attorney Markowicz stated he understands that at the last hearing session there was a discussion about storm water management and the impact of this development on the abutting lots. He introduced Gerald Hardisty, the applicant's engineer, who commented on the design and how it will handle the water that was formerly on this lot.
Gerald Hardisty with CES Engineering, Andover, Connecticut appeared before the Commission and stated this is a very small lot. The current situation is the entire area is a low lying piece of land and as homes were built on the abutting lots, it raised up the land around this lot. Because this is the last lot to be developed, all the water moved toward it and it ponds in this area after a storm due to the thick layer of topsoil. What has been done to alleviate the ponding problem is the design of the proposed house is such that most of the storm water that hits on the house and lawn will be directed out into the street so that it can run down to the storm drainage on Kalish Avenue. The back side of the house, which is too low to get to a storm basin, will be treated by introducing a catch basin and dry well in the back yard. The sub material in this lot is a porous sand with a percolation rate of one inch per minute. By installing the dry well and the catch basin, Mr. Hardisty stated they can introduce the storm water to the sub surface and get the water out much quicker than it dissipates now.
Mr. Hardisty stated this is a small area which should be able to handle a two-inch rainfall relatively easily. They did not design for greater than that because that is a yearly event and they did not want to make the dry well oversized.
Attorney Markowicz stated Lori Longhi has some photographs of the neighborhood she would like to present to the Commission. She was also asked last month to try to meet with the two neighbors that were present at the December 20 hearing session. There was a meeting held and Ms. Longhi has a letter from the land surveyor who conducted that meeting.
Lori Longhi, 1427 Enfield Street, submitted photographs taken on a rainy November 20, 2001. She presented photos facing north on Kalish, looking east on Kalish, on Bernardino facing the lot and facing west looking at the lot. It was also suggested that they meet with the neighbors and she presented a letter from Mr. Aschliman, the land surveyor, stating on Tuesday, January 8, 2002 he met with the two neighbors on the site. The purpose of the meeting was to explain the development of the subject property. The meeting lasted approximately forty-five minutes and Mr. Aschliman noted it seemed to alleviate some of the neighbors' concerns although they were still not in favor of the proposal. Ms. Longhi stated Mr. Aschilman also left his name and number with the neighbors if they had any additional questions. However, he did not hear from them.
Chairman Howard opened this public hearing to the audience.
John Tornetor, 36 Kalish Avenue, and Chris Cunha, 10 Bernardino Avenue, spoke to this Commission regarding this application.
Mr. Tornetor stated after the December 20 hearing they had a chance to review some documents they did not have available at the initial hearing. They did have concerns over the water problem but after doing a little homework, it comes down to John Cabbibo's comments that this dry well will alleviate the water problem. Mr. Tornetor spoke to both Mr. Cabbibo and Jeff Bord in Engineering. He questioned why their first letter a year ago stated any development would cause problems to the abutting residents. Now, there is a memo stating the applicant's representatives came up with a solution. Mr. Tornetor noted how low the water table is this year and the fact that when the water table returns to normal levels, there will be an adverse effect on their property. He presented some pictures showing how low this property is. Mr. Tornetor expressed a concern that if the seven-foot hole in the ground is not properly maintained, it may become a hazard. The engineer they met with also confirmed to them if the dry well is not maintained, it will malfunction. Mr. Tornetor stated if the water table returns to normal and there is a bad winter and wet spring, he was told the water could pond over and it would take two or more days to recede.
Mr. Tornetor stated the other issue they have is the way they want to do the contour of the land. He presented a picture of the property and noted they plan to make a ditch all the way around their properties. Today, the water is ponding over the whole area. If a house is constructed, there will be a loss of square footage and the water will be channeled to one small area and flood his property.
Mr. Tornetor stated all the properties are 100' x 125'. He noted they want to put a well on the property rather than city water. When he bought his home, he was told the lot that is the subject of this application was wet, has been wet for fifty years and would never be built on. The realtor confirmed this. Mr. Tornetor stated all the components, the well, the dry well, raising the home five feet and putting a ditch around the property, create concerns for the abutters. He thought that the Wetlands Commission is also concerned as shown in their memo submitted to this Commission.
Mr. Tornetor stated when the developer says he is going to pitch the water out to Kalish Avenue, the only drain is located in front of his house. If they are going to pitch the water out to Kalish Avenue, it runs down the street and around the corner into his front drain. When the water runs in the back, they will get the problem in the back and during heavy rains, they will have all the water coming around.
Mr. Tornetor stated they knew they were going to sell this property two years ago. The town just put in brand new streets and had the road dug up. He felt they could have had storm drains put in front of this property at that time and they chose not to do that. To build this up, he felt, would create a small area where they will always have ponding water with associated mosquitoes.
Mr. Tornetor brought up the easement going through the property. He talked to the Town Assessor. Also, Mr. Spazzarini called Mr. Cunha up and tried to sell him that easement last week. The Town Assessor has told him he is paying taxes on it and he felt this was a clouded area. He asked that this Commission take into consideration their concerns.
Mr. Cunha stated in talking with the engineer that came out to see them, he stated that the water levels are going to be more concentrated now because the house is going to be there. If the swales are made around the house, he felt there would be more water flowing there. Mr. Cunha also raised the possibility that the new homeowner may be a lawn enthusiast and install irrigation. This will make the entire area worse. He asked that the Commission consider all these aspects.
Mr. Cunha stated he has two small children. He brought up the fact that if the dry well cap comes off, it may pose a danger to his children.
Mr. Tornetor stated they said they were going to include a condition to maintain the dry well but he questioned if a new homeowner cannot maintain their home or lawn, how will they maintain the dry well. He noted this lot has been there for fifty years for a reason. He further stated that they are saying in the letter from the Wetlands Commission that they cannot do the calculations because the corner lot was filled in. He stated when the corner lot had a sign advertising a public hearing, Mrs. Buttacavoli should have attended that hearing and voiced her concerns. The abutters now feel that by building a house and building it up as high as it needs to be will cause a water problem that the town officials know about.
Mr. Tornetor noted the tests that were done did not include representatives from the town.
Mr. Cunha stated a part of the land that does not get water now will now be getting the water. With the proposal, everything from the driveway back is going to go along side the property, back down and across the back of his swing sets. There is now no water problem in this area but Mr. Cunha had a concern that once they start channeling all this water, it will move to his property.
Mr. Cunha stated they have been told by the developer that they cannot reach the storm sewer on Bernardino because the street is higher than the back yard. However, in one of the letters it states that the sewer is not capable of handling the increased runoff. Mr. Tornetor noted if the town sewer cannot handle the increased runoff, how will a 1,000 gallon dry well six feet in the ground do so. He stated when the water table comes up to four feet, that dry well is going to be half full right from the start. He submitted additional pictures to the Commission.
Mr. Cunha asked that the Commission not rush into a decision. He felt this needs to be looked at further. He does not want to end up with water problems.
Mr. Cunha stated some of the correspondence indicates that the property was changed by the road construction and that is not true. Two feet where they put in the new curbs was the only change on this property.
Attorney Markowicz noted the approval that was rendered by the Enfield Conservation Commission on November 26, 2001. Attorney Markowicz read the formal approval into the record. A copy of this report is in the file for this application.
Attorney Markowicz stated the Commission has to find that the property is on a paved public roadway and it is. In addition to the two reports from the professional engineers, one from the Assistant Engineer from the Town of Enfield and one from their engineer, the Commission has also received a recommendation from the Town Planner. He recommends approval of this unmerger because the application meets all the requirements. Attorney Markowicz noted that Ms. Longhi had a conversation with Mr. Giner and they discussed the status of unmerging of properties such as this. There are four to five applications per year. The Town Planner stated that he remembered two lots that were denied unmerging. One was due to wetlands issues and the other had a garage on it which tied it to the property that they were seeking to unmerge.
Attorney Markowicz stated he is sensitive to the neighbor's concerns. Mrs. Buttacavoli has owned this property since 1947 and used to do gardening on it. It is the last lot to be developed in the area. Everyone else built on their lots, raised the elevation of their property, and dumped their water on this lot. In order to demonstrate to the Commission that this lot will not cause drainage problems for the neighborhood, it is necessary for Mrs. Buttacavoli to come in with an engineered plan and dispose of the water that is being dumped on this property. Their engineer and the Assistant Town Engineer believe it is being done effectively and will mitigate any problems. Attorney Markowicz read the memo from the Town Engineer confirming this.
Attorney Markowicz stated when this property was the subject of an application a year ago, the dry well solution was not proposed. This resulted in a problem for the Town Engineering staff. The applicant has now addressed the problem and the solution is satisfactory to the Engineering staff of the Town of Enfield.
Gerald Hardisty, the applicant's engineer, stated at the edge of Kalish Avenue they have taken elevations at the curb line. Running from south to north, the elevations are 112.28, 112.04, 111.87 and 111.65. He stated the drainage along the curb will be running to the northwest away from Mr. Tornetor's property. The water that hits the house and the driveway will be shed into Kalish Avenue. What they are trying to do is eliminate whatever surface water they can and get it out into Kalish Avenue. The remaining water will be reduced. Mr. Hardisty acknowledged there is nothing they can do about ground water problems and that is why the proposed home is raised up. The construction will not exacerbate the ground water problem but it will also not fix it.
Attorney Markowicz stated Mrs. Buttacavoli is eighty-seven years old. This property appears to have always been taxed as a lot. The applicant has demonstrated that she has met all the requirements of Section 3-5.1. Approval has been recommended by the Town Planner and the Town Engineer and the applicant's engineer has concluded that this development will not exacerbate and is likely to help resolve some of the drainage problems the neighbors have had. Attorney Markowicz stated he does not feel that drainage should be an issue and their engineer has stated that the work they performed was done to insure there would not be the kinds of problems that the neighbors have had in the past. He believes the applicant has more than met the burden and if the Commission fails to unmerge the lot, the property will be rendered valueless. Attorney Markowicz requested approval and stated he had no problems with the proposed conditions.
Commissioner Egan stated the drainage issue is a real problem in this town. A lot of development has taken place in wetlands and there have been a lot of drainage problems even with the installation of catch basin/dry well systems. What happens is they fill up, people mow their lawns and they are covered over and do not function properly. The result is severe flooding to the neighbors. Commissioner Egan asked if there would be a basement in the proposed house. Mr. Hardisty stated there would not be. Regarding whether they did any borings, Mr. Hardisty stated they did not. They excavated to seventy inches while he was on the site and there was no indication at that time of where the water level was. There was some mottling at 12" to 26" but below that it was not a reduced color which would indicate high ground water. He was not sure if the mottling was due to high percolation in the upper layers or high ground water table.
Commissioner Egan asked how the applicant can address the issue of this dry well possibly being filled in and not functioning after the owners move in. Is there some failsafe way that this dry well can be designed so that the neighbors will not get the flooding on their property? Mr. Hardisty stated in this case the way the dry well works, it is a cylinder that is perforated on the sides and there are two feet of crushed stone around that. If grass debree gets into the bottom of the dry well, as the water came up it would still be able to get out into the permeable areas of this dry well. The other consideration is it is on the property being developed and closest to the house being developed as opposed to the neighbors. Mr. Hardisty noted if anyone was impacted by the reduced operation of this catch basin, it would be this homeowner.
Commissioner Egan discussed the elevations and noted they are showing a flow to this catch basin. He asked if the elevation is 111 in the corner next to the abutting property owner, will there be a swale to channel the water. Mr. Hardisty stated presently they have a spot elevation of 110.5. The catch basin itself will be at 109.2 so there is a very slight grade and they are not planning on cutting anything into the ground.
Commissioner DiPace referred to condition #4 regarding the responsibility of the homeowner to clean out the dry well periodically. He asked if there is any way to put a notation on the deed to this effect to eliminate any future problems. Mr. Giner stated he would defer to the Town Attorney's opinion on that question. He suggested the deed reference the conditions of the Commission's approval.
Attorney Markowicz stated it would be unusual to put that kind of specific language on the deed. He typically says that it is subject to all land use approvals and to the local land use ordinances. He stated if the periodic inspection and clean out of the dry well system is a condition of approval and not done, the owner's lot will be the first to flood. The neighbors would also contact the Zoning Enforcement Officer if there was flooding.
Commissioner Duren stated one concern was the cover falling in or being removed. He asked if it could be welded on. Mr. Hardisty stated they have proposed a Type CL catch basin similar to what is used on state highways. The covers are not easy to remove and there will be a need to access the dry well for maintenance.
Chairman Howard stated the Commission gave the applicant direction in December to talk to the neighbors and that was accomplished. Also, he cannot agree more with Commissioner DiPace. Chairman Howard felt if the condition is not in writing and the property owners become handicapped, there has to be something that gets the maintenance done. He would like to see a notation on the deed. Attorney Markowicz stated he would suggest language that the premises are conveyed subject to the conditions of the Special Use Permit issued by the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission on (date). He would be happy to add that language to the deed.
Commissioner DiPace asked if the maintenance of the dry well should be more defined rather than say periodically. Attorney Markowicz suggested the language be to "inspect no less frequently than annually and clean out as necessary." Attorney Markowicz also pointed out their engineer stated he thought one of the reasons there was ponding on this lot is because there is a thick layer of top soil above the permeable sand and then on top of the top soil, there is a lot of debree. This creates a mat over time allowing the water to pond. He felt when this property is cleaned up, it will probably drain a lot better than it has in the past two decades.
Chairman Howard opened this hearing a second time to the audience.
John Tornetor stated no one knows whether this dry well solution is going to be adequate. He discussed the mosquitoes that inhabit this site in the summer due to the ponding water. He reiterated this past year has been one of the driest in history. If the water table returns to normal and these tests were done again, the results would be different. He stated the abutters have to know that the solution is definitely going to work and no one can guarantee that. There is also the issue of the installation of the well on the property and whether it will affect the ground water flow.
Mr. Cunha stated all the properties are about the same height as the dry well proposed. They are eight to nine inches below normal water levels this year. If irrigation becomes a factor in the neighborhood, the situation will be worse. Also, if the water level returns to normal, the dry well will be constantly full. He asked for a guarantee that this dry well solution will work prior to the home being constructed.
Attorney Markowitz stated the Commission has to rely on the professionals that do this for a living and he cannot guarantee what is going to happen tomorrow. He felt with the degree of engineering certainty established, that this is an appropriate use of the land and that the home proposed will be compatible with the neighborhood.
Chairman Howard closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Egan, to approve PH#2290, application for a Special Use Permit to unmerge lots of record for the purpose of creating a new building lot on land zoned R-33 located at 152-156 Kalish Avenue, Josephine Buttacavoli, Applicant, Owner, with the following conditions:
Conditions to be met prior to signing of mylars:
All mylars submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.
The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns.
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.
A note shall be placed on the mylars submitted for signing stating it is the homeowners' responsibility to inspect, clean out and maintain the dry well no less than annually and clean out as needed to avoid off-site impacts from site drainage. A notation shall be placed on the deed with the following language as proposed by the applicant's attorney: "The premises are conveyed subject to the conditions of the Special Use Permit issued by the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission on January 17, 2002."
Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits:
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.
Drainage calculations, signed and sealed by a professional engineer, shall be submitted along with a watershed map and the test pit data and detailed cross section of the proposed dry well.
Conditions which must be met prior to the issuance of a Zoning Certificate of Compliance:
Complete as-built plans certified to Class A-2 accuracy shall be submitted prior to the issuance of any certificates of zoning compliance.
No certificates of compliance shall be issued until the Enfield Water Pollution Control Authority has inspected and approved the sewer connection for the project.
General Conditions:
This application is not a subdivision or re-subdivision as defined by regulation.
The building structure on this lot shall be built without a basement.
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.
Special Use Permits are valid for a period of twelve months from the effective date of approval. Failure to secure a building permit 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.
By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.
The motion was approved by a 6 - 1 - 0 vote. Commissioner Egan voted nay.
The reason for approval is the application meets the regulations regarding merged lots in the Enfield Zoning Ordinance. With this application, the engineers have shown that the water problem has been addressed.
PH 2291 Staff initiative for an Amendment to the Subdivision regulations to provide for technical changes to the public improvements standards to include: upgrading the road way cross-section; replacing granite curbing with bituminous curbing; adopt “tear-drop” shaped cul-de-sac; revise the minimum road width for residential roads; revisions to the road repair details and notes; allow use of state approved HDPEP (plastic pipe) along with the existing RCP (concrete pipe); remove the 1987 bonding figures from the regulations; and other minor technical and typographical changes. (Town initiative: no deadline)
The Commission was presented with a document identifying the proposed Subdivision Regulation changes by page number and section along with the Town of Enfield Subdivision Regulations showing those changes in bold type. The Commission conducted a comprehensive review of each section and listened to a presentation from Town Engineer Jeff Bord regarding the proposed changes. Mr. Giner requested that the Commission add the word "shall" on page 13, section l, first sentence. The sentence would read "No subdivision plan shall be approved until the necessary performance guarantee amounts have been calculated..."
The Commission had concerns regarding some of the changes recommended.
Commissioner DiPace recommended a change on page 17 to keep minor right of way widths at 60 feet rather than the 50 feet proposed for the Business or Industrial Districts. It was the consensus of the Commission that they agreed with this change.
Chairman Howard initially did not favor eliminating the granite curb requirement and changing it to bituminous concrete curbs but conceded to this change after hearing the reasons presented.
Commissioner DiPace brought up page 29 and the new language proposed for item 10, Street Numbering and Index Plan. The language presently states right and left side of the road and Commissioner DiPace would like to see that changed to north and south. Mr. Bord stated they will clarify that language but the purpose is to get a standard way of numbering throughout the town.
Chairman Howard opened this public hearing to the audience.
Paul Fox, 4 Wyncliff Park, Bloomfield, suggested regarding streets, to keep the right of way and reduce the pavement. He works for a firm that does a lot of traffic engineering and they did the plans for Elm Street. He noted there is never enough right of way. Mr. Fox stated between 1982 and 1988 he was the Planning Consultant and then Clerk of the Works for the Spruceland Subdivision. He noted that sloped granite curbing is not an appropriate material in a residential subdivision. He discussed problems with Spruceland regarding maintenance of such granite curbing. He felt granite curbing works where you have long runs that are not traversed subsequently.
Chairman Howard agreed with the increase of the right of way and noted the need for clarification regarding the house numbering standards.
Some discussion followed regarding approving the revised Subdivision Regulations with conditions. Chairman Duren made a motion to approve the proposed Subdivision Regulation revisions with the conditions that the item pertaining to the right of way in business or industrial areas be changed from 50 feet to 60 feet and the language regarding the 911 house numbering be resubmitted prior to the effective date of these regulations. Commissioner Egan stated he would like to see a clean copy of the proposed Subdivision Regulations prior to the Commission taking action. Commissioner Duren withdrew his motion.
Chairman Howard asked that this be an agenda item for the February 7, 2002 meeting for action by the Commission.
Commissioner Weseliza made a motion, seconded by Commissioner DiPace, for a recess. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote. The Commission recessed at 9:46 p.m. and reconvened at 10:00 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - NEW
PH#2253.02 - Application for an 18-lot Subdivision on 29.85 + or - acres with frontage on the west side of Broad Brook Road north of Town Farm Road and south of Charnley Road in an R-44 District (Assessor's Map 103, Lots 5 and 6). John Tittarelli, Owner/Applicant. (May be kept open until February 21).
Attorney Charles Parakilas appeared before the Commission regarding this application along with Paul Fox, their Planning Consultant, and Len Norton, their professional engineer.
Attorney Parakilas stated this is a refiling of the same application of development entitled PH#2253 which was approved by this Commission on July 26, 2001. At that time, all conditions of approval were met by the applicant except for the bonding which inadvertently was filed late without a request for an extension. Since time has run out, the applicant has no other alternative but to reapply for the same development. Attorney Parakilas noted the only difference between this application before the Commission tonight and the application that was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on July 26, 2001 is that the applicant in this application is requesting a waiver of the granite curbing requirement. Attorney Parakilas stated it was his understanding after hearing the last public hearing that this is likely to happen.
Attorney Parakilas stated the infrastructure has been completed in this subdivision except for the finished coat. The developer has put in bituminous curbing because if he had not, there would be silt all over the place. The legal requirements, the deeding of all the roads, the deeding of all the easements and all the conservation easements have been approved by the Town Attorney's Office. The bonding has been posted and is in place with the Department of Finance. They are requesting reapproval of this subdivision in order to make it a reality. Attorney Parakilas stated they are requesting final approval this evening.
Mr. Giner stated the proposed motion before the Commission is identical to the one that was approved previously. The only change he recommended is the removal of conditions 11, 12 and 13 relating to a conditional approval because they are requesting final approval. Mr. Giner also noted that John Cabbibo has reviewed the plans and there is a note from him in the file that the plans are identical to those approved by the Planning and Zoning Commisson on July 26, 2001.
Chairman Howard opened this public hearing to the audience. No one spoke in favor or against this public hearing.
Commissioner Egan stated he noticed there was some testing for EDB and he asked if the results have been obtained. Len Norton stated at the time a home is built and they drill the well, any well water test that is done will have to be tested for EDB. If EDB is found, it is the developer's responsibility to install activated carbon filters. They will have to supply a water test to the Health Department before they are issued their discharge permit and their approval by the Building Department.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner DiPace, to waive the granite curbing requirement for PH#2253.02, Tittarelli Subdivision. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve PH#2253 - application for an 18-lot subdivision on 29.85+ or - acres with frontage on the west side of Broad Brook Road north of Town Farm Road and south of Charnley Road in an R-44 District (Assessor's Map 103, Lots 5 and 6), John Tittarelli, Owner/Applicant. This approval is subject to conformance with the referenced plans, as may be required to be modified by this motion, and the following conditions:
Conditions to be met prior to signing of mylars:
The Town Engineer shall review and approve the final plans.
The final mylars shall indicate locations and details for all traffic safety signing as required by the Town Traffic Safety Officer. These signs are to be installed at the developer's expense prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy.
All mylars submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.
The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns. A copy of this approval motion shall either be incorporated on to the final mylars and separately filed on the land records prior to the signing of the mylars.
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.
A separate erosion and sediment control passbook shall be submitted in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer.
A landscaping bond, in an amount to be determined by the Planning Department, shall be submitted to the Town.
A developer's agreement shall be required for any on-site or off-site public improvements, which agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney and which shall be executed and may be recorded in the Town Clerk's Office prior to the filing of the mylars.
The applicants have chosen to offer a fee in lieu of open space. The appraisal for the pre-development value of the property is $179,100 resulting in a payment of $17,910 as fees in lieu of open space. A note shall be placed on the mylars stating that a $995 per lot fee is owed to the Town of Enfield prior to the first sale of each lot.
Any deeds or easements for public improvements or land dedication shall be submitted, in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney, to be held in escrow until completion and acceptance of the improvements by the Town.
Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits or start of construction:
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. Final plans reflecting the approval of the Commission shall also be submitted in a digital format prescribed by the Director of Planning unless waived by a three-fourths majority of the Commission.
Sign mylars shall be filed with the Town Clerk no later than ninety (90) days from the expiration of the appeal period or this approval shall be null and void. The applicants shall provide such mylars to the Planning Department sufficiently in advance of this deadline to allow for review of the plans and the arrangement for the Commission Secretary to sign the mylars. The applicant may request an extension of the filing deadline in accordance with Section 8-25 of the Connecticut General Statutes. Any extension requests must be received in time to allow the Commission to act on them before the original deadline expires.
A pre-construction meeting between the applicant, site contractors, project engineer and Town Staff shall be held.
No building permits may be issued and no lots may be sold within the subdivision prior to a final approval being filed on the Land Records.
Conditions which must be met prior to the issuance of a Zoning Certificate of Compliance:
Complete as-built plans certified to Class A-2 accuracy shall be submitted prior to the issuance of any certificates of zoning compliance.
The required street trees shown for the individual lot shall be in place unless seasonal conditions preclude such in which case they shall be planted at the earliest planting opportunity.
The Zoning Enforcement Officer shall determine that the fee in lieu of open space owned the Town of Enfield shall have been paid for the subject lot.
No certificates of compliance shall be issued until the drainage has been completed.
No certificates of compliance shall be issued until the sub-grade and base course for the road have been completed, inspected and approved by the Town Engineer.
No certificates of compliance shall be issued until the North Central Health Department has inspected and approved the on-site septic disposal system for each lot.
No certificates of compliance shall be issued until the North Central District Health Department has inspected and approved the water delivery system for each lot.
No certificates of compliance shall be issued until the street signs, stop signs, or any other required traffic or fire safety signs are in place.
General Conditions:
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.
Lot #1 shall not have any direct access to Broad Brook Road.
All public improvements in connection with this subdivision shall be completed by January 17, 2007 or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission in accordance with State law and its regulations.
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.
The reasons for approval are the plans meet the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Enfield and will not have an adverse impact on the area.
OLD BUSINESS
Commissioner DiPace asked about Public Hearing #2289 advertised for this evening. Mr. Giner stated there was a typographical error in the public hearing number and a second legal notice will be advertised. It will be on the agenda for the first meeting in February.
Bond Releases
PH#2233 - Request for bond release for erosion and sediment in the amount of $3,010 for the Jehovah's Witness Hall on North Maple Street.
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner DiPace, to approve the bond release for erosion and sediment in the amount of $3,010 for the Jehovah's Witness Hall on North Maple Street. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
PH #2113 - Request for bond release for Engineering (Site Bond) in the amount of $96,460.00 and Erosion & Sedimentation Bond in the amount of $2,335.00 for CVS at 47 Hazard Avenue.
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Duren, to approve the bond release for PH#2113, CVS, 47 Hazard Avenue, in the amount of $96,460.00 for engineering and $2,335.00 for erosion and sediment control. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
PH #1947 Request for release of Phase II Engineering Bond for Misty Meadow Subdivision .
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve the bond release for PH#1947 for the Misty Meadow Subdivision in the amount of $75,100. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
PH # 1947 Request for release of Erosion & Sediment Bond for Phase I of Misty Meadow Subdivision.
This bond release was tabled pending receipt of an opinion from the Town Attorney's Office.
Review of Fiscal Year 02-03 proposed Budget. (Continued from 1/03/02)
Later in tonight's meeting, Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Howard, to approve the proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2002-03 as submitted by Mr. Giner. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Review of possible amendments to Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws. (Continued from 1/03/02)
This item was tabled to a later meeting.
SPR #1161 - Application to convert space to office at 546A Enfield St., Zoned BL, Map 33, Lot 62, Stanley Glemboski, Jr. applicant/owner. (Legal Deadline for Action: tonight unless extension granted.)
Jack Stacio, President of the Enfield Teachers Association, appeared before the Commission regarding this application. He stated he has rented the space at 546A Enfield Street and is before the Commission to respond to questions.
Mr. Giner stated there were some concerns regarding parking with respect to the meetings being held at this location. He has had some calls asking whether this space is being used for a public assembly use that is causing problems in the neighborhood.
Commissioner Duren stated there is a statement from Mr. Glemboski stating how many people are at this location at one time. He questioned if it was in violation of any fire regulations.
Regarding parking, Mr. Giner stated the parking is existing. He asked that Mr. Stacio explain about the meetings.
Mr. Stacio stated as the Enfield Teachers Association, they hold their major meetings in schools. When they call their 554 teachers together, these meetings are usually held at Fermi or Enfield High School or JFK Middle School.
Commissioner Duren stated there are 13 members of the Executive Board and he questioned how large a space this is. Some review of the plans followed.
Mr. Stacio stated the Commission has a document confirming they have overflow parking across the street. If for some reason the parking lot does get filled, the owner of the former JI building across the street has given them permission to park in that location.
Commissioner DiPace stated the concerns he has heard are in regard to the parking on Cook Street. People that live three to four houses down have cars parked in front of their homes. Commissioner DiPace stated there was a cease and desist order issued because whoever owns the front piece of property also purchased the house behind it. They have cut down trees and graveled the area for parking encroaching into the residential neighborhood. Mr. Giner confirmed there has been some work done to the property behind this. Trees have been removed and the delineation is gone. Mr. Giner suggested if the Commission feels the parking works, that there be a requirement that the owner install curbing to keep that delineation. Mr. Giner added that the owner had come in previously inquiring about expanding the business use in the back and was given some options. He now looks like he is expanding the parking lot and the use into the adjacent lot. Mr. Giner stated he does not think Mr. Stacio has anything to do with this.
Mr. Giner stated if the Commission feels the parking is sufficient for a maximum of thirteen people, he suggested the Commission include this as a condition. Also, that the curbing on the back parking area be replaced or some type of delineation be placed there to make sure there is no encroachment upon the residential zone from this lot.
Some Commissioners suggested a fence be installed.
Mr. Stacio stated he uses the facility as an office and has a secretary there. Once a month, there is an Executive Meeting along with other random meetings. He stated he does not know why there have been complaints regarding the parking. The only time they had any trouble was with an individual that had a parking facility on the grass in the house contiguous to this rented portion of the building. There were no signs and when the people came in to meet, they just parked on the street and where the grassed lawn was. When people came and asked them to move the car, they did. This occurred during their first meeting at this site. He noted it is a small street and there is insufficient parking in the neighborhood. At night, some of the neighborhood residents park in the place where he rents.
Commissioner DiPace stated that the neighbors have said that a lot of time it was hard for them to get in and out of their driveways. They wanted to make sure there was adequate parking to handle this use.
Mr. Stacio stated the meetings are held at 3:30 p.m. or 4:00 p.m. The stores in the area are open until approximately 5:00 or 6:00 p.m. Commissioner DiPace suggested if there are problems with parking in the future, that the meetings be held later in the day or at night.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner DiPace, to approve SPR #1161 with the condition that there be a delineation of the parking area and the residential area by a chain link fence along the property line. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
10. New Business
SPR #1166 - Site Plan Review and Sign Permit for Cosmetic Additions And Signage on the existing (former J. C. Penny's) store at the Westfield Shoppingtown - Enfield, 90 Elm Street, Zoned BR, Map 43, Lot 16 & 17, JSA, applicant / Westfield Corp., Inc., owner. (Legal Deadline for Action: March 7)
Patrick Rockwell, an architect representing May Company, appeared before the Commission regarding this application. He stated they are planning a Filene's expansion in the former J. C. Penney's location.
Mr. Rockwell stated the existing exterior design is over thirty years old. In an effort to bring new interest to the store and mall, they are proposing exterior cosmetic improvements. These improvements revolve around the street level, existing west entry, and establishing a new south entry into the store. The existing pre-cast concrete panels at the street level will be painted a solid consistent color to blend with the existing exterior materials. At each entry they are proposing to install an exterior insulated finishing system over the existing exposed aggregate concrete panels to draw attention and modernize the overall design of the store. The exterior insulated finishing system will be painted to match the newly painted street level walls. The new south entry will be centered on the street level of the south elevation. A fourth buttress will be constructed to add symetry and the new entrance will closely resemble that of the west entrance. The board finished pre-cast panels between the existing buttresses on the south elevation will be removed and infilled with the exterior insulated finishing system to further achieve a sense of balance. They are proposing a new landscaping plan around the site along the west and south elevations. They will also provide a new patterned sidewalk area at each entrance.
Commissioner DiPace asked about the color scheme for the exterior. Mr. Rockwell presented the color scheme to the Commission. Commissioner Duren asked if these were the exact colors. Mr. Rockwell stated the exposed aggregate is a brownish gray and they will be using tan as the color. He presented a swatch to the Commission. They will match this color to the paint that is out there now. There are sections of the store that are white and they would like one consistent color.
Commissioner Weseliza asked if both Filene stores will be the same. Mr. Rockwell stated the signs will be the same. Commissioner Cooper asked if the new signs will be the same color as the signs presently on Filene's. Mr. Rockwell responded they will be. Commissioner Duren asked about the smaller signs. Mr. Rockwell stated the Home and Men's Store will be black painted aluminum. The Filene's signs are lit and are black aluminum with a white face.
Commissioner Duren asked if the signs have been approved by Roger Alsbaugh. He recalled a request to put a sign in the area of Target. Mr. Rockwell stated there are too many signs in that location and the Commission would not be approving such a sign. Commissioner Duren noted Roger Alsbaugh's memo dated December 22 denying the attached wall sign to be located on the north common mall and Target Store but he sees it included on the plans. Mr. Rockwell stated they included both signs in the submission because they were submitted at the same time. At the time, they were requesting the four groups of signs and have since eliminated the sign by Target because it was denied by town staff. Mr. Rockwell confirmed they are not looking for approval of the sign by the Target store.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve SPR#1166 as submitted with the exception of Sheet #8. The Commission is not approving the sign on the front with other Westfield and Target signs but they are approving the signs in conjunction with the facade changes. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
SPR #1167 - Application for modification of plans for florist wholesale at 294 George Washington Road, Zoned I-1, Map 64, Lot 103, Montgomery Wholesale Florist, Inc., applicant, Floral Realty Inc., owner. (Legal Deadline for Action: March 7)
Mr. Giner stated the Commission has received plans regarding the roof top units and they are before the Commission tonight. Mr. Giner stated this application is before the Commission because they are adding roof top units and the Commission wanted to know how they would be screened.
Charles Blanchard, President of Montgomery Wholesale Florist, 350 Russell Street, Hadley, Massachusetts, appeared before the Commission regarding this application. He stated they purchased this building at 294 George Washington Road and they are requesting a change of use to put a wholesale florist use on the site.
Mr. Blanchard stated there was one roof top unit for the office area. The warehouse area was previously heated using space heaters. In the wholesale florist business, Mr. Blanchard stated they do a lot more of the activity in the warehouse. They upgraded the heating and air conditioning by installing roof top units. The only other modification they made to the building was to increase the voltage from 200 volt service to 480 volt service.
Commissioner Duren asked if the roof top units have been screened. Mr. Blanchard stated they have been installed but not screened. He had an engineer make a drawing in an attempt to show the appearance of the roof top units from the roadway. On drawing 2A it shows it from 80' away from the building on George Washington Road at a six foot height of someone standing there and observing them. A second drawing shows the perceived elevation at 100' away. Mr. Blanchard stated the units are presently in place and it is a solid light colored unit. If additional screening is required, they would like to know what that should be.
Mr. Giner asked if the 100' drawing would be at the street level. Mr. Blanchard stated the further away you go from the building, the more you see of the units. If you are standing in the parking area, you cannot see the roof top units at all.
Mr. Giner questioned if any Commissioners have viewed the site. Chairman Howard was disappointed that the units have been installed without coming to the Commission first. Mr. Giner stated he will inform the Building Department that roof top units are within this Commission's jurisdiction.
Mr. Blanchard presented photographs of the building.
Chairman Howard suggested the Commission not take action until Commissioners have viewed the building.
Regarding the roof top units, Mr. Blanchard stated they are a beige color.
Commissioner Weseliza asked if these units are necessary to run this business. Mr. Blanchard stated they are. The warehouse area previously was only used for storage. In the wholesale florist business, the warehouse is their main operation area. There will be a refrigerated unit to store the flowers and office partitions for employees. He stated it is both important for the employees and the flowers to have both heat and air conditioning in the warehouse area. There was no air conditioning of this area previously.
Commissioner Duren asked if the refrigeration units are self-contained. Mr. Blanchard stated they are and they will be constructed inside the building itself. They do have compressors on the outside and they were planning to put the compressors on the roof for the two coolers. Commissioner DiPace suggested a drawing be submitted showing what will be installed on the roof.
Mr. Blanchard stated he can get drawings of the compressor units themselves which are not really that big. He will have to have the engineer do the same type of drawing for these compressor units. The reason he did not do this initially is they are very low and will be located to the back of the building and he doubts they will be visible. Mr. Giner offered to meet Mr. Blanchard at the building and explain what is required to meet the requirements of the ordinance.
This was tabled until February 7, 2002 to give Commissioners an opportunity to view the roof top units. Commission members also requested the Commission receive a drawing showing everything planned to be installed on the roof.
SPR #1168 - Application for modification of conditions imposed on previously site plans for retail store selling automobile accessory parts at 585 Hazard Avenue (Scitico Plaza), Zoned BL, Map 110, Lot 12, Ryan Preble, applicant, P&D Realty, owner. . (Legal Deadline for Action: March 7.)
Mr. Giner stated this site was the former karate school at Scitico Plaza.
Mr. Preble stated the waiting room is facing Hazard Avenue and there is a doorway but there is no door there. It is a walk through. Mr. Preble stated the proposed use is a retail store for new automotive parts dealing with import cars. There is no machining involved and the use is strictly retail. Deliveries will be in the back or front and there is accessibility at both locations.
Commissioner Weseliza asked if they will be selling batteries or items that involve hazardous waste. Mr. Preble stated they would not.
Commissioner Lefakis made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve SPR#1168, application for modification of conditions imposed on previously approved site plans for retail store selling automobile accessory parts at 585 Hazard Avenue. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
PH #2283 Request for extension of 65-day time frame to conduct a public hearing for an application for a conversion from a two-family residence to a three-family with loft at 1657 King Street, Zoned R-33, Map 16, Lot 50, Christine Clark, applicant/owner.
Commisioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to grant an extension of 65 days for PH#2283, application for conversion from a two-family residence to a three-family with loft at 1657 King Street, zoned R-33. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Other Business
8-24 Referral request from Town Council for recommendations on proposed Family Resource Center at 110 High Street.
Commissioner DiPace made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to recommend approval to the Town Council for recommendations on the proposed Family Resource Center at 110 High Street.
Commissioners DiPace and Egan cited the lack of information before the Commission regarding this proposed Family Resource Center. Some discussion followed on the 8-24 requirements which require referral to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Commissioner Egan stated they are asking for recommendations and not asking this Commission to approve the application.
Mr. Giner stated they are asking for an approval because a negative vote would have implications on the voting. The Commission is being asked to recommend whether the Town Council should approve this application.
Commissioner Egan questioned how this Commission can approve something when they do not have all the information. He noted there should be recommendations made but the Commission has not received sufficient information to issue an approval.
Mr. Giner stated the Town Council will eventually be acting on this application. What the Commission is requesting this evening could be conveyed to the Town Council and this Commission could relay to them that in the future they would like a presentation and the ability to ask relevant questions.
Commissioner DiPace discussed the options for handling this application. Mr. Giner stated the Town Council is holding a public information meeting on January 30. Commissioner Egan noted that this Commission does not have the jurisdiction to do a public hearing. Commissioner DiPace stated it is necessary for this Commission to act on the 8-24 and if they do not within a certain time frame, it is automatically approved.
Mr. Giner stated the Commission can request a presentation prior to making their recommendation. The Town Council will not object to having staff give a presentation.
Mr. Giner asked how much detail the Commission would like. During the discussion, Commissioner Weseliza cited the need for the Commission to be provided with enough information to issue an approval.
Following further discussion, Chairman Howard asked if the Commission would like to refer this to the Town Council in a positive manner or hold off on any recommendation and have a presentation at the next meeting. It was the consensus of the Commission that Mr. Giner will report to the Commission at the February 7 meeting on what occurred during the Town Council public hearing to be held on January 30.
Commissioner Lefakis stated he noticed there is what appears to be a second floor mezzanine. While it is a nice architectural feature, it results in spending additional money to install an elevator. Mr. Giner stated the elevator is optional at this time. They wanted an area for parents to have meetings while the children were attending programs downstairs. His understanding is the cost of the elevator is so high that they will not put it in but it will be designed so that it could be added. Mr. Giner noted the architect is designing for all possibilities but it will come down to the budget allocated for the project.
Chairman Howard requested a motion to extend the meeting beyond 11:00 p.m. Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lefakis, to extend the meeting beyond 11:00 to review the Fiscal Year 2002-03 proposed budget. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Receipt of Applications
The following application was accepted by the Commission:
SPR#1169/FLD #012- Application for modification of plans previously approved for reconstruction of a portion of the former Bradlees space to accommodate a Barnes & Noble bookstore, reconstruct front facade and install dumpster pad in rear of store at Enfield Commons, 25 and 39-41 Hazard Avenue, Map 45 and 56, Lots 8, 1 and 2, zoned BR, Parkside Associates Limited Partnership, Applicant/Owner.
This application will be on the February 7, 2002 agenda.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 11:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
_______________________
Karen Krebs, Secretary
Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission
jmr
|