THESE MINUTES ARE PRESENTED IN DRAFT FORM AND HAVE NOT BEEN FORMALLY APPROVED BY THE ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OFFICIAL COPIES OF MINUTES, WHEN APPROVED , CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE TOWN CLERK OR PLANNING OFFICE
ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 4, 2010
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Thursday, February 4, 2010 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman Charles Duren called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Charles Duren, Chairman
Charles Ladd (arrived at 7:06 p.m.)
Nicles Lefakis
Michael Dumont, Voting Alternate
Ronald Gregory, Voting Alternate
ALSO PRESENT: José Giner, AICP, Director of Planning
FIRE EVACUATION ANNOUNCEMENT
Chairman Duren gave the fire evacuation announcement.
MINUTES
Commissioner Lefakis made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Dumont, to approve the Minutes of January 21, 2010. The Minutes were approved by a 4 – 0 – 0 vote.
STAFF COMMENTS
a. Town Attorney (in writing)
b. Zoning Enforcement Officer
Mr. Giner gave an oral report and stated the staff has been concentrating on the clothing drop off boxes. In Ginny’s absence, Mr. Giner had Roger Alsbaugh go out and take pictures and get the proper information. They then sent certified letters to all the property owners as well as the actual bin owners giving them ten days to remove the bins. They have also been investigating a couple of home occupation complaints. Mr. Giner will have a written report for the Commission at the next meeting.
Mr. Giner stated he talked to Ginny today and she is hopeful to return in the near future. In the meantime, Mr. Giner is assigning other resources to zoning enforcement.
c. Director of Planning
Mr. Giner stated the Commission should have a couple of items in their packets. He noted they received an announcement for the Annual Federation of Planning and Zoning Agencies Conference and Banquet which is scheduled for March 18, 2010, a meeting night. In the past, the meeting has been canceled so that Commission members can attend this dinner. There are a couple of ZBA members that also wish to attend. The topic is what Connecticut Land Use Commissioners need to know about green development. If anyone wants to attend, they should let Mr. Giner know. Chairman Duren suggested Mr. Giner send an email to Commission members because there are so many absent this evening.
Mr. Giner stated he put a couple of things in the Commission’s file about what can happen when neighbors don’t get along with each other.
Mr. Giner stated he did get a phone call from Lee Zekaria, the Manager of Enfield Commons, and also a call from the Community Crusade for Children who are putting out the Kiducation bins. The bins are located at Enfield Commons Plaza and Stateline Plaza. They are asking if the Commission would consider amending their regulations to allow non-profits to put bins up. Mr. Giner checked with other towns and some towns allow them and some do not. Some towns limit them to 501C companies. Mr. Giner distributed a list of the charitable contributions in the communities they serve. Mr. Giner stated if the Commission wishes him to look into how other towns handle these bins, he would be glad to do so and share his findings with the Commission. Mr. Giner told the people involved that this was purely a policy decision by the Commission.
Chairman Duren stated the Town of Enfield has a local group that has a store in town for this purpose. To him, anything from out of town would be taking away from this local group. Chairman Duren felt the bins are unsightly and Mr. Giner will have to determine who is non-profit and who is not.
Commissioner Lefakis agreed with Chairman Duren. Just this weekend he went by a bin on the corner of Main and Pleasant Street and there were items left outside the box on the ground. Mr. Giner stated that is the poster child for these issues and that is the one where people just seem to pile junk on it.
Mr. Giner stated the list he distributed shows the charitable contributions to various communities. Commissioner Ladd noted there is nothing listed for Enfield.
Commissioner Gregory stated he is involved with a couple of non-profits. People donate items at Allied and at Loaves and Fishes. Loaves and Fishes has been accepting donations for twenty-five years.
Commissioner Dumont agreed with Chairman Duren about the bins. There does tend to be an eyesore around the bins. He is more in favor if it is specific to the location where they have a bin. If it is just different groups putting them in all over the place, he is against that.
Mr. Giner stated the letters have been sent and he will go out and inspect next week. Today they found three more bins and they will be sending letters out to those people. People are on notice that they can’t put up these clothing bins.
Mr. Giner stated under the town’s temporary storage ordinance for residential homes, PODS are limited to a certain amount of days. Mr. Giner had a request from the library because they have their Friends of the Library sale. Apparently all the books were stored in the basement which was objectionable to the fire marshal. They would like to be able to store the books in a POD temporarily during the spring for no more than a couple of months before they have their sale. Mr. Giner stated even though there are institutional uses allowed by special permit in residential zones like schools and churches, temporary storage is not really allowed. Mr. Giner suggested that he write something to include in the regulations by Commission approval where people can come in and apply for these temporary pods with a time certain. He will be writing up something. Commissioner Ladd asked if that would be covered under education similar to the trailers at J. F. Kennedy School. Mr. Giner stated those were temporary classrooms but these PODS are for storage. Right now you can come in and get a zoning permit for them if you are in a residential house but it has to be for a certain amount of time and then you can’t renew it after a certain amount of time. Chairman Duren stated this was because people were using those and truck bodies for storage. Mr. Giner stated when the regulations were written, it wasn’t taken into account that there were institutional uses that also fit into the residential areas. A church may have a tag sale they are putting on and need a place to store things temporarily or have a book sale. Mr. Giner stated it was no more than two months that the library wanted the POD. He will write something up for the Commission’s consideration.
Mr. Giner stated he and Commissioner Ladd did attend a workshop yesterday about reusing commercial strips and design regulations for commercial strips. Commissioner Ladd stated a lot of the items discussed were almost the opposite of the town’s ordinances. For instance, the speaker was talking about maximum setbacks and putting the parking in the back. The same thing was true with the height of buildings. Instead of having minimum height, have maximum height. The speaker showed examples of how that worked in a lot of communities throughout the country.
Chairman Duren stated the Planning Magazine has been going that way also. Commissioner Ladd stated they discussed form based zoning and he didn’t think by itself was a good thing. However, if you mixed it in with the other zoning laws it was good. Form based would be that it looks like the rest of the neighborhood. The speaker said if you don’t go too rigid with it, it would be a good way to change the zoning a little bit. Performance zoning for mixed uses was also discussed. Rather than saying because this is an R-33, you can’t put a convenience store in there, in some R-33’s a convenience store might be a good use in the area. It might be good to have a mixed use rather than rigid zoning for every neighborhood.
Mr. Giner stated today he received sample ordinances from the speaker at this workshop. Commissioner Ladd suggested that Mr. Giner copy them and hand them out to the Commissioners for their review. Mr. Giner stated the town has some design review guidelines - mostly for Thompsonville Village. They do have maximum setbacks as the Commission noticed with the fire house discussion. They actually have to bring it closer to the street. Some of the elements are in the town’s regulations. They suggested along your commercial strips and along where the malls are right now that if you are rebuilding that they have to be rebuilt to certain standards. Chairman Duren stated Hazardville has parking in the rear of the properties. Mr. Giner stated across the street from town hall, the bank and the medical center, is a good example of those design regulations. However, the regulations probably need a little more beefing up.
Commissioner Ladd stated in Hazardville the parking would have to be planned when a space becomes available in the rear. Chairman Duren stated the Commission allowed for usage of some of the buildings to be commercial on the first floor and residential upstairs. Commissioner Ladd stated Enfield Federal in Hazardville is a good example.
Mr. Giner stated one of the things they showed was how if you took some of those properties like the Institute and try to get the property owners to grant cross easements, you could have a very nice little parking lot in the back that is available to those businesses. Maybe have some shops in the back that would attract people to that area. You wouldn’t see the parking from the street.
Mr. Giner stated the other thing they suggested at the workshop is when you leave your car, you become a pedestrian but we don’t plan for that. Mr. Giner noted the gentleman that complained about getting into the movie theater. If you have to park at the extreme of the parking lot in the mall, how do you get to the mall? There are no sidewalks or pathways to make it pedestrian friendly. They had some very good examples of things that worked and Mr. Giner cited Alan Woolwich, a former Assistant Planner for the Town of Enfield and now a Planner for a county in Florida. They showed some nice slides of what he had done in his county. Mr. Giner has those regulations.
Chairman Duren stated he recalled the plans for the Gateway Project on Enfield Street showed parking in the rear. Commissioner Ladd stated they had parking on the other side of the tree belt rather than in the rear. This way, it would move the buildings forward. Mr. Giner stated they had some good ideas. Commissioner Ladd stated they also showed community access points and how the transition would look. He noted if you stand on the Longmeadow line on Route 5, if you look one way it looks pretty nice but if you look the other way, it’s not quite so nice. They explained how you could zone to encourage upgrading areas.
Chairman Duren stated as soon as we get our master plan approved, that is something we have to start working on – to make the regulations comply with the master plan.
CORRESPONDENCE
Chairman Duren reported Correspondence includes the notification for the Annual Federation of Planning and Zoning Agencies, and two letters pertaining to the Kiducation Bins, one from the mall owner and one from the company itself. Chairman Duren noted there is a Notice of Violation directed to the owner of 3 Rim Street. The owner has put two entrances on his driveway which goes on to a state highway. It says the driveway has existed for some time. Chairman Duren stated he has seen it because the owner has put a lot of fill in front of the house and he’s done a good job on rebuilding that home. Mr. Giner stated the regulations require that the Commission approve more than one driveway cut. Chairman Duren stated he would also need a permit from the state. Mr. Giner stated what is needed is for this to be added to the next agenda. The regulations require approval and Mr. Giner will put this item on the February 18 agenda for the gentleman to plead his case and tell the Commission what he’s done.
Chairman Duren brought up the gentleman on North Maple Street/ Bacon Road that was given until February to correct his property. He asked that Mr. Giner check on that. He has three driveways on to North Maple and he doesn’t know how many on Bacon Road.
Chairman Duren stated on the table tonight is the Planning Commissioners Journal. There are referrals from the Capitol Region Council of Governments. There is a Notice of Action for the Inland Wetlands Agency dated January 19, 2010. Chairman Duren stated the Inland Wetlands Agency was to vote on something before the Commission tonight and he asked if it was passed. Mr. Giner reported it was.
Chairman Duren reported Correspondence includes the notices from Mr. Giner that were sent out regarding the clothing bins. He added that the notices were quite thorough. Correspondence also includes Making the Best Land Use Decisions which was discussed previously. There is also a notice of the time change for P&Z Meetings.
NEW BUSINESS
a. FLD#025 – Permit for conducting activities within the 100 Year Flood limit related to the reconstruction of Post Office Road/Town Farm Road, Town of Enfield, Department of Public Works, Applicant.
Chairman Duren requested a roll call of the Commission.
Jeff Bord appeared before the Commission along with Jeff Lemay and Jane Witherell of the Maguire Group regarding this application. Mr. Bord stated the reconstruction of Post Office Road and Town Farm Road includes approximately 7,000 feet of roadway reconstruction. It runs from Raffia Road to Abbe Road. They are proposing a ten-foot bikeway five feet off the north side of the road that will run the length of the project. Mr. Bord introduced Jeff Lemay who will give the Commission additional detail.
Mr. Lemay distributed an outline of what he will be discussing this evening.
Mr. Lemay stated this is the reconstruction of Town Farm Road and Post Office Road. This project has been around for quite a while and they have gone through a lot of reviews with the Department of Transportation and other agencies. The main purpose of this project is to improve safety along this road. Some of the high points would be revising the vertical and horizontal geometry for better site distance and drivability. There are three intersections, Weymouth School Road, Wallop School Road and Abbe Road which they are realigning. Those roads are somewhat offset. They will also be installing a formal drainage system on this road which currently has very limited drainage.
Mr. Lemay stated there are quite a few funding agencies for this project. The most recent one is ARRA funding. That’s one of the more critical ones at this point because there are some strict time lines and things that they need to meet to have this money obligated to the project. Right now they are looking at a March 2 obligation date and they need to have all their permits ready to go for this project. This ARRA funding will be contributing several million dollars. Other funding sources are the Department of Transportation. There is an urban streets program through CRCOG. They have Federal High Priority Project funding and whatever costs these agencies don’t pick up, the town will have to provide.
Mr. Lemay stated with these funding agencies, there are a lot of design standards that they need to meet. They have been through meetings with the Connecticut DOT and the Army Corps of Engineers. They have quite a few permits that they are going for regarding this project. They have a flood management certification from DOT that was issued already. They are currently in the process of getting an Army Corps permit, a general permit Category 2, Section 404. That permit is on its way. The Army Corps is waiting for the Connecticut DOT to sign off on their water quality certification. They received word this week that it has been approved by DOT and the draft letter is being put together. The Army Corps should be receiving that shortly.
Mr. Lemay stated they have the Town of Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses permit which they just received approval for this week. The development permit for special flood hazard areas is what they are seeking tonight.
Mr. Lemay stated they also have a change of use permit with the Connecticut Department of Public Health. They are doing some work in the vicinity of the Hazardville Water Company property and they need an easement on their property and a little right of way taking for the roadway. They went through the process with the Connecticut Department of Public Health and received a permit from them.
Mr. Lemay stated the last permit listed is the storm water discharge permit which they will be seeking from the Department of Environmental Protection about thirty days prior to construction. Anytime this month, they will be sending that in.
Mr. Lemay stated they advertised the project in December and will have the opening of bids next week. They anticipate awarding the project in mid to late March with a spring construction 2010 start date. The project is scheduled to go for about two years and the project will be under full construction and inspection by another town consultant.
Mr. Lemay stated the project includes about 7,000’ of roadway reconstruction. The roadway construction begins 200 feet east of Raffia Road and it will end about 150’ east of Abbe Road. They will be providing a thirty foot wide roadway that will have eleven foot travel lanes and four foot shoulders. This roadway will be super elevated around the horizontal curves. There will be some minor adjustments to the horizontal vertical geometry. There are some vertical crests that they are looking to soften to gain better site distance.
Mr. Lemay stated there are three intersections that will be realigned. Weymouth School Road is very skewed and they are looking to make this a ninety degree angle intersection. The same situation would be true with Wallop School Road. Abbe Road is kind of offset. If you drive down Abbe Road and you cross Town Farm Road, it’s more or less an offset. When you get to Town Farm Road you have to do a jog to continue on Abbe Road. They are looking to make that a straight through shot. They are upgrading guard rails to the current standards. They are providing a ten foot wide bikeway for the full length of the project. They have bridge modifications to accommodate the bikeway and also the new roadway section and they are installing a scour counter measure underneath the bridge along both abutments. That is to mitigate a current erosion problem on the west abutment.
Mr. Lemay stated they are installing roadway drainage systems. They have three existing small systems on the road that they are modifying. There are three cross culverts that they are upgrading. There are three new drainage systems that they are putting in. They are installing storm water treatment at each one of these storm sewer systems.
Mr. Lemay stated the benefits of the project include a mitigation site which will involve species removal and replanting of the species. This is a Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection requirement and they have had several meetings with them to mitigate the wetlands impacts on this project. They recommended that they provide a mitigation site. There are extensive plantings planned along parts of this roadway specifically in the vicinity of the Scantic River. There are plantings on both sides of the road for several hundred feet on both sides of the bridge. They are providing storm water treatment throughout the project. They are collecting storm water and they are treating it prior to discharge.
Mr. Lemay stated they have sedimentation and erosion controls which are designed to DEP guidelines. They also have a storm water quality manual by DEP. These erosion and sediment controls will be in place for construction and also after construction.
Mr. Lemay stated the project will generally be constructed under traffic so that the contractor can utilize a one-way alternating traffic pattern during working hours during the week day. He would be required to establish two-way traffic at the end of each work day and also provide that on the weekend. Chairman Duren asked if that includes the bridge as well. Mr. Lemay stated the bridge will always have two-way traffic across it. They have a staging plan that will shift the two-way traffic and there will be two stages for that. The contractor is required to maintain access to all properties at all times.
Mr. Lemay stated there are quite a few utilities on this road. Most of them are overhead – CL&P, AT&T and Cox. They have coordinated with all of these utilities. They have probably thirty-five to forty pole relocations that are required and they have plans that were done by CL&P that show all these pole locations. They have Yankee Gas that also provided them with relocation plans and Hazardville Water Company water relocation was designed by Maguire.
Mr. Lemay stated they have a waste stock pile area and this site will be used for testing soil to determine if anything is contaminated or whether it can be reused on the project. The staging area will also be located at the transfer station. That’s the place where the contractor can store equipment and also any materials that he may have.
Mr. Lemay showed the plans to the Commission. North is straight up on this plan. There is Post Office Road and it turns into Town Farm Road as you cross the Scantic River heading east. The project begins on Raffia Road on one side and ends up on Abbe Road. Mr. Lemay discussed the meaning of the various colors on the plans. Yellow indicates the proposed pavement for the roadway. The orange is the ten-foot wide bikeway. The light green sections indicate fill along the roadway embankment. The brown shaded area indicates the cut for the roadway. The black areas indicate driveway reconstruction. The darker green areas indicate some of the storm water quality treatment practices that they have. There are two water quality basins located near the bridge. The dark blue is the Scantic River channel. The red line shows the flood plain boundary on the west side and on the east side. This boundary was established through hydraulic analysis that was performed for this project. The green hatched area is the mitigation site and the blue lines with some triangles on them are the wetland boundaries.
Mr. Lemay stated the Scantic River is located in a FEMA regulated A zone which is a zone done by approximate methods. No detailed study was done. There are no published elevations for this portion of the river. Also, there was no flood way established. The flood plain limits shown were established based on their hydraulic analysis and they developed those based on the elevations.
Mr. Lemay stated the watershed for this particular bridge is about 73 square miles and the flood plain in the vicinity of the bridge is about 700’ or so. The proposed improvement that they have within this flood plain area is they are widening the bridge approximately eight feet to the north. This is basically to accommodate the bikeway. That widened section will be founded on piles. They are putting in foundation extensions or abutment extensions. They will also be removing the wingwalls that are currently on the north side of the bridge and putting new ones in. They do have temporary access roads that they will be putting in on all four corners of the bridge. These are shown in the dark hatched area.
Mr. Lemay stated also associated with the bridge, they will be putting in scour counter measures in the form of rip rap. It will be installed around both abutments and it will wrap around both abutments. They have worked with DOT on this and they have gone through a lot of variations of how they want to protect this bridge. They are wrapping it around because the flood plain is so wide here that you have the potential for some significant contraction scouring. All this water is now going to come back through this little opening. To protect the area around the abutment, they wrapped the rip rap around it. The rip rap is going to be keyed into the channel. They are trying to match the existing ground as much as they can with the proposed rip rap. It’s all determined by the hydraulic analysis and elevations. In the event that the center of the channel does have some scour, this has the ability to launch itself and reduce that amount of scour. They will also be keying in this rip rap on the upstream and the downstream ends and by keying in Mr. Lemay means that you create a deeper section of rip rap so that it prevents any undermining.
Chairman Duren asked if the width of the channel underneath the bridge would remain the same. Mr. Lemay stated it will remain the same.
Mr. Lemay stated the rip rap has to be constructed in two stages. They can’t go in there and do both sides at once. They’ll block off a portion of the river to construct one side and then block the other side off to construct the remaining abutment.
Mr. Lemay stated there is a component existing right now, a rock wier underneath this bridge, which spans the length of the channel. There is speculation that this was created by vandalism. They have had several meetings with DEP out in the field and they requested that they remove this weir because it inhibits certain things like fish passage and aquatic wildlife passage. That is one component of this project.
Mr. Lemay stated they have the flood plain and the mitigation site. This is a Department of Environmental Protection requirement to mitigate their wetland impacts. This was chosen as the best site for this. It involves some invasive species removal and will enhance the overall Scantic River watershed. There are quite a few larger trees in this area and those trees are going to remain by a request of the local Inland Wetlands Agency. There will be no change in topography for this mitigation site. It is removing the plantings and the ground for the most part will remain undisturbed.
Mr. Lemay stated in terms of the roadway, they have some embankment fill that will encroach into the flood way a little bit. In terms of the impacts, hydraulically they performed a hydraulic and a scour analysis all under the direction of DOT. They have a special unit. They are required to do this and had quite a bit of work involved in doing this. As a result, there are no increases in water surface elevations along this stretch of the river that they have analyzed as a result of the proposed project. One benefit is removing the existing weir is going to help mitigate or prevent any future clogging. There is quite a bit of debris that does come down this river at times. They will also provide a uniform channel which will help with flow efficiency.
In terms of the flood storage, Mr. Lemay noted they actually have a slight decrease in water surface elevation on the upstream stretch of this river as a result of this project. It is in the order of 400’s of a foot right at the bridge and upstream it produces 200’s and 300’s. That type of decrease is not a concern. There is quite a wide floodplain here and any kind of negative impact, which they don’t anticipate, will be absorbed by this very large and wide floodplain.
Mr. Lemay stated the fill that they are putting in here as a result of widening the road and installing the bikeway will be about 400 cubic yards of fill along this four or five hundred foot stretch. In comparison to the amount of storage, Mr. Lemay stated there is over 200,000 cubic yards of storage. In terms of what they are putting in here, it is 0.2% of change in the flood storage or no significant impact in terms of what they are doing here.
Mr. Lemay stated they have a flood contingency plan. In there it has measures for performing work at low flows or normal flows. The contractor is required to store material and equipment outside the 100 Year Flood Plain and he’s also required to monitor the weather and modify his construction operations accordingly. There is also listed a responsible party for enforcement for this flood contingency plan.
Chairman Duren asked if any Commissioners had questions.
Commissioner Ladd was just curious why the water mains weren’t shown on the map. There is one that comes across the Scantic about where the access roads are. He knows that because they had a leak about five to eight years ago and they had to put a patch on it. He was wondering if that was why the weir was there. Mr. Lemay stated the water main is actually under the bridge now. It was two years ago when the water company reconstructed that main and the water main now goes up, goes under the bridge and comes back down. It doesn’t show on this plan but it does show on the construction plan. Commissioner Ladd stated at that time they didn’t know where the valve was to shut it off and they had to have a retired employee show them. Mr. Bord stated that is why they did the relocation. There was an area under the bridge that was just made for the water main. There was a knock out where you could put the water main under the existing bridge and they tied it in where the old main was and they abandoned that section. Mr. Lemay stated sheet 48 does show the water main.
Chairman Duren stated he has a question from Commissioner Longhi. On page 8, it stated in the last paragraph that there is a slight increase in the upstream bridge form and it gives the distance in feet and then it doesn’t say what the 01-02 actual increase is. There’s no indication whether it is inches, feet or yards. Mr. Lemay stated it is feet. Chairman Duren stated Commissioner Longhi’s concern was if it was a major change. On page eight, there is no indication of what the elevation is – feet or yards.
Mr. Giner stated the Commissioners all have copies of the flood ordinance. This is not under the zoning ordinance. It’s under the town’s flood ordinance. These are the standards that the town is required to adopt by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to maintain the town’s flood insurance premiums at an affordable rate. The Commission is acting under the town ordinance and there is a memo with a proposed motion.
Chairman Duren stated Jack Sheridan has shown pictures of the bridge and how it has eroded. Mr. Bord stated that is the scour that Mr. Lemay talked about. The rip rap will take care of that. Mr. Bord stated the piles that the bridge is built on are in excess of seventy feet deep so it was not in danger of collapsing. All the rip rap that used to be there either got thrown in the channel or washed downstream over the years. Mr. Lemay stated the rip rap they used originally was smaller in size and they have gone through computations to determine the right size and made it a little bit larger to prevent it from moving around.
Chairman Duren asked if the highway department has plans to check that stream so that the weir isn’t put back. Mr. Bord stated they can make that known to them when they check the drainage outlets. Ms. Witherell stated there is a maintenance plan that was put together as part of the Inland Wetlands application for the catch basins. Chairman Duren stated he is sure people put it there for a reason and there will be attempts to put it back.
Mr. Bord stated the rip rap that is going to be used now is called standard rip rap and that size is from 18” up to 3’ in size. The rip rap that was put down there was probably a modified rip rap which is 8” to 12” in size which someone can pick up. An 18” piece of rip rap is going to stay there a lot longer.
Ms. Witherell stated for Inland Wetlands they had some changes made. Chairman Duren asked about the Inland Wetlands number. Mr. Giner stated it is Permit #533 that was issued on Tuesday evening.
Mr. Lemay stated none of the changes that are part of the revised sheets have any bearing on any of the work that was done in the flood plain. But since they did revise the sheets, they felt it was necessary to submit those.
Chairman Duren closed FLD#025.
Commissioner Ladd made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lefakis, to approve FLD#025, permit for conducting activities within the 100 Year Flood Limit related to the reconstruction of Post Office Road/Town Farm Road, Town of Enfield Department of Public Works, Applicant. The motion was approved by a 5 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternates Dumont and Gregory voting.
Chairman Duren noted the permit meets the requirements of the ordinance. All necessary permits have been obtained from the federal, state and local governmental agencies from which prior approval is required. Also, the proposed development does not adversely affect the flood-carrying capacity of the area of special flood hazard. The development when combined with other existing and anticipated development will increase the water surface elevation of the base flood more than one foot at any point.
- Section 8-24 referral – Referral under Section 8-24 of the Connecticut General Statutes for various public improvements related to the reconstruction of Post Office Road/Town Farm Road, Town of Enfield Department of Public Works, Applicant.
Chairman Duren stated he has a couple of questions from Commissioner Longhi. They stated previously that there are no sidewalks at the start of the bike path for 150’ from the road. Also, at the end there is 200’ from the intersection of Raffia Road and he asked if that is correct. The question is what do you plan to do for the bicyclists and motorists when you have 200’ of space from the large and busy intersection.
Mr. Bord stated Chairman Duren is talking about from Four Corners Package Store going towards J. F. Kennedy. They were proposing at the beginning to realign that intersection but it required land acquisitions and changing the parking and moving spaces at the Four Corners Package Store. The property owner did not look favorably on that so they changed their design and scaled it back to come up to the driveway of the Four Corners Package Store. They have site plan approval to install a sidewalk in front of their property going toward J. F. Kennedy to the north and until that is done, what will happen is the bikeway will outlet into the parking lot and you would have to traverse through he parking lot and get to the sidewalk that is at their other driveway entrance. It was a combination of the property owner not wanting to lose land or parking and the cost along with that realignment which went up towards the tennis courts for a good distance. They were able to save some money and not have to rebuild that road and the town felt they would address that intersection at a later date outside of this project.
Chairman Duren asked if there is signage or some kind of road markings warning the bicyclists or the drivers. Mr. Bord stated it will begin at the parking lot and you would have to go through the parking lot to get to the other side. Chairman Duren asked if the property owner is going to allow the parking lot to be striped. Mr. Giner stated this is a bike path and the bicyclists at that point will become part of the roadway system which is normal. Bicyclists don’t go on the sidewalks but they have to follow the rules of the road like everyone else. Chairman Duren asked if there are going to be warning signs at the end of the bike path for those coming into the intersection. Going south on Raffia Road is there anything to warn people that there is a bike path ending there or they might run into bicyclists? Mr. Giner stated it probably would be a good idea to put some signage there that says bike path ending in so many feet. Mr. Lemay stated they can add some additional signs for the bike path. Right now they have signs that say bikeway and bike path. They can add some additional ones that have a little more verbiage like ending bike path to alert the bicyclists and the motorists that there is that transition between the bike path and no bike path.
Chairman Duren suggested going south and north on Raffia Road something indicating bike path ahead. They expect a large usage of the bike path and that is a very busy intersection. Mr. Bord stated it will stay as a four way stop until it is improved in the future.
Commissioner Dumont stated you might want to consider doing it on the Abbe Road side also.
Chairman Duren asked how to take care of this signage. Would it be a recommendation to the Town Council? Mr. Giner stated that would be the procedure. Chairman Duren noted the last time the Commission had a problem when they made suggestions but they will go ahead and make suggestions again. Chairman Duren suggested that they consider signage at the end of the bike path for the bicyclists and motorists going north and south on Raffia Road, south on Abbe Road and Simon Road and also Post Office Road.
Commissioner Ladd made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lefakis, to recommend approval to the Town Council of the proposed improvements related to the reconstruction of Post Office and Town Farm Roads as presented by the Town of Enfield Public Works Department at the February 4, 2010 Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission meeting pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes Section 8-24. The recommendation included a suggestion to consider signage at the end of the bike paths for the bicyclists and motorists going north and south on Raffia Road and south on Abbe and Simon Roads, and also on Post Office Road. The motion was approved by a 5 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternates Dumont and Gregory voting.
OTHER BUSINESS
a. Discussion of Bylaws
Chairman Duren requested that Mr. Giner have the revised Bylaws printed and they have not yet been printed. The Commission will review them when they have the printed copy.
c. Discussion of Tag Sale Regulations
Mr. Giner stated he did research what other towns have done and he will put something together for the Commission.
e. Discussion of Draft Plan of Conservation and Development
Chairman Duren stated he found a few more errors. Mr. Giner suggested that Chairman Duren email them to him.
Chairman Duren asked if the Commission is going to get together with the Committee and the Town Council. Mr. Giner stated he talked to the Town Manager and he was going to talk to the Town Council and pick a couple of dates. It will probably be held at J. F. Kennedy with the public invited. Mr. Giner will prepare a power point presentation.
Commissioner Ladd made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Dumont, to add to the agenda a preliminary discussion with Thomas Froment representing 53 Windsor Street LLC. The motion was approved by a 5 – 0 – 0 vote.
f. Discussion with Thomas Froment representing 53 Windsor Street LLC
Mr. Giner stated state statutes allow for people to come in and request informal discussions prior to submitting a formal presentation.
Thomas Froment, 19 Nancy Drive, Enfield, appeared before the Commission representing 53 Windsor Street LLC. They purchased 53 Windsor Street back in December, 2008. They cleaned up the property as soon as they took ownership and worked with the town.
Mr. Froment distributed a packet of materials with renditions of typical houses they would like to build on Windsor Street and Church Street. This is very typical and working within the guidelines of houses to be taken down and rebuilt.
Mr. Froment showed the front elevation on Windsor Street which is the blue house on the rendition. It is an aerial showing the first floor layout. The second page shows how they secured the house, cut trees and started cleaning the area. It would be a multi-family house on a 50’ lot. Windsor Street is 99% multi-family. There are two-family, four-family and one six-family. These are side by side two story homes that would be built. They have an open floor plan with the kitchen facing the front and the dining area. On the Windsor Street house, there’s a common driveway between 45 and 53. On the other side, it would be a typical driveway on both sides of the house with a side entrance for easy access.
Mr. Froment stated the houses are designed to be 1,222 square feet meeting the regulations. They are three-bedroom with two and a half bathrooms. There is a half bath in the kitchen facing the street. There is a hatchway providing access to the basement.
Mr. Froment stated the present condition of the Windsor Street house is pretty shot. What they would like to do is knock the house down and rebuild from scratch. He brought this plan forward before the Voices of Thompsonville and the Enfield Revitalization and Strategy Committee. What they are looking to do is promote owner occupied housing and not rental housing. It would be easier to sell a new house than a reconditioned old house. With the times being as tough as they are, this would be going back to some of the older family values where grandparents are actually taking care of the grandchildren while the parents are working. Parents are selling the bigger houses and it would be buying a house with the family next door. It could also be first-time home buyers looking for their first house.
Mr. Froment stated there is an existing house at 104 Church Street. It is a house that is next to 53 Windsor Street. If you look at the page behind that, that is the frontage on Church Street.
The main reason Mr. Froment is before the Commission is because the lot is 9,699 square feet. If this was to be zoned Thompsonville, right now it is R-33. Prior to that it was R-17. Prior to that there were no bylaws or regulations. They looked at splitting the lot so that they could put some new life into an old neighborhood. They are trying to stay consistent with the neighborhood and trying to give the Commission an overview of how it would look. The current regulations state that you can’t approve or act on anything under 5,000 square feet. They are looking to modify that to 4,500 or 4,700 square feet so that this plan may move forward.
When Mr. Froment met with the town in regards to his idea on this property, he was asked a couple of questions like what would be the impact if they were to do so. He referred to a map in the booklet he presented and he noted the blue house is the proposed location. The yellow would be the new proposed building lot. The orange would be the impact it would have if the regulation was to be reduced from 5,000 square feet. The opposite side on Church Street is actually 45 Windsor Street as it runs front to back. He would able to subdivide and knock down some garages if he chose to do so. Down the road just a little further is a lot that runs front to back with Windsor Street and Church Street. The second house in from Alden Avenue has a large lot which also could be done. The impact would be that four new houses were built in an existing neighborhood. Mr. Froment felt some spot zoning doesn’t hurt. He added that the pink and green on the map indicates existing lots that fall well below 5,000 square feet. Most average about 4,100 or 4,200 square feet.
Mr. Froment stated from North Main Street coming down Church Street you have Russell Street, Windsor Street, Martin Street and New Street. These all contain lots that are under 5,000 square feet. If you look over in the lower left corner where Alden Avenue crosses over Church Street and heads down toward New Street, that was the 1983 subdivision where they combined some lots and built two-family houses and put the lot line right through the two-family house.
Mr. Froment stated he believes that this project could bring some new life into an old neighborhood. He thinks that the house plan that they are proposing works within the neighborhood. When they designed the house, they went from Franklin Street all the way to the Thompsonville cemetery and they went from I-91 all the way to the Connecticut River. If you look at the sizes of those lots, none of those lots even come close to an R-33 or R-44.
Mr. Froment stated he was told that provided the land was never split prior to 1952, he would be allowed one split. He went back to 1888 and no one has ever split the land.
Mr. Froment stated this is a concept he would like to bring forward and he asked the Commission’s opinion on it. Maybe he would start to move in a more formal process with some direction from the Commission on how to proceed.
Mr. Froment referred to the booklet again and stated after the colored map there is a map of record for the property at 45 Windsor Street. It shows his two buildings with the house being towards the bottom of the page and his seven or eight garages being on Church Street. The next page is the right hand side of his property which is 104 Church Street and 59 Windsor Street.
Mr. Froment referred to Lot #45 which is 45 Windsor Street. That is a single lot.
Mr. Froment stated the potential here is if this was to get approved, they would be building two new houses in an existing neighborhood and they would be promoting owner occupied. They would be working with town agencies for first-time home buyers.
Chairman Duren asked if the map contains street numbers or lot numbers. Mr. Froment stated these are street numbers.
Commissioner Ladd stated he has seen something similar to this in Springfield. They are building on nonconforming lots in Springfield and some pretty nice units have been going up.
Mr. Froment stated the Town of Vernon just did a street. They went in and bulldozed the whole street and put in new houses. They are owner occupied and are single and two and three family uses. Mr. Froment stated he is trying to stay within the master plan.
Chairman Duren asked if most of the houses in the Windsor Street area are duplexes. Mr. Froment stated they are all duplexes. Chairman Duren stated that is one of the things that the master plan recommends – duplex housing.
Mr. Giner stated he has had discussions with Mr. Froment a couple of times. He thought it was important that they show the ultimate plan. Given the lot size and the development, there could be a result of four or five more homes. Mr. Giner stated at the workshop he attended yesterday and in the literature, lot size and density is not necessarily the enemy. The important elements here are form, design and ownership of the building. Mr. Giner stated staff is supportive of the type of design Mr. Froment is proposing and it fits within the neighborhood as he has shown. On the map, the green designations are all less than 5,000 square feet. Mr. Giner suggested limiting it to 4,500 square feet. The home being discussed has a big open lot on Church Street and if you go by the area, it looks like there should be something there.
Mr. Froment stated there are sidewalks on both sides of the street. The property is vacant and was purchased in 2008. The economy is a little tough but they went forward with their plan. They have met with the Voices of Thompsonville and the Revitalization Committee and everything they heard has been positive. Now that spring is ready to come along, Mr. Froment was invited to discuss this project and he has been working on it. He noted there is spot zoning that could be done. Mr. Giner stated spot zoning is not a good word to use because he doesn’t think it is spot zoning as it is illegal under state statutes. What Mr. Froment is showing is that this would be a natural extension of the Thompsonville Village zone which would not make it a spot zone. If the Commission thinks that this is a good idea for staff to present, one of the things Mr. Froment mentioned is we are looking at the entire area but sometimes a project can get so big and you lose the opportunity. You should take the opportunity to improve a smaller area and the larger area will fill in. Mr. Giner stated he can get together with Peter Bryanton and come up with an extension plan for that neighborhood. He also asked Mr. Froment to contact the neighbors to make sure they are all behind it.
Chairman Duren stated we are talking about fill in and regulations down town. This is a good example if you have a bad building that you can’t use to live in.
Mr. Froment stated this would put some new life into the neighborhood.
Commissioner Ladd asked what would be done with the trees that are on the lot. Mr. Froment stated they have been cleaning the lot because the lot was heavily treed. They have been cleaning out the area and taking down some small maples. Commissioner Ladd stated he likes having some trees on the lot. He wouldn’t like to see it ripped bare. Mr. Froment stated they wouldn’t have to leave it completely bare. They are using 48% of the lot including the driveway. They can cover up to 85%. They went with the minimum amount trying to meet all the criteria. This is the design that fit.
Commissioner Dumont stated there is one driveway toward the front and another driveway which they are sharing with the neighbor. Mr. Froment explained that back in the day, the driveway between 45 and 53 Windsor Street was a common use. The owner stated he would not have a problem with the idea provided they left the driveway as it stands and has stood for the past forty years.
Commissioner Dumont stated what he is asking is that no one park their vehicle on the side.
Chairman Duren stated the Commission had that on Belmont Avenue. Mr. Giner stated that was a two-lot split all owned by the same owner. This one is by a different owner.
Mr. Froment stated there is nothing that is preventing him from doing the Church Street application using the 50’ with ten foot driveways on each side and the 30’ house. It’s just that working with the neighbor and not having anyone against him, he put it into his plan to avoid litigation down the road.
Commissioner Lefakis stated it is actually good too because there is less pavement. He asked what is the plan for the house at 104 Church Street.
Mr. Froment stated the style stays the same. His work is adjacent to that. If that property owner wished to put an application, he has the land to put in an identical parcel which is shown on the colored map. The worst thing that can happen is you would have four multi-family houses built on Church Street.
Chairman Duren stated he has seen it where relatives take the other side of the house in order to help with the purchase price. Mr. Froment stated this was done years ago.
Mr. Giner stated he would like some direction. This is one of his priorities and it is a priority of Ray Warren. It is a small example for the area to try out before everything is rezoned in the area.
Commissioner Gregory discussed his familiarity with the area because he lived at 71 Windsor Street and his wife’s aunt owns 59 Windsor Street. He discussed the history of the properties. He added they did tear down two or three houses on the corner of Martin and Pleasant and they put three houses in there. Mr. Froment discussed the three bars that were in the area previously.
Mr. Froment stated he bought a piece of property on Church Street and he renovated it and they have it rented to a young couple who they hope will buy it. Mr. Froment stated he is not looking to be a landlord. His project is a small project and it is downtown. It is his opinion that someone needs to put a shovel in the ground and they are willing to take a shot at it.
Mr. Froment stated some of the 50’ lots in the area were combined to make municipal parking lots. Some were combined in 1983 to make those two-family houses.
Mr. Froment didn’t know if this was something that he would have to make an application under R-33 and ask for a special permit. He noted when he read the regulations, no one has the authority to do anything if it is under 5,000 square feet. Commissioner Ladd stated the Commission can’t waive the 5,000 square feet. It would have to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Giner stated there is really no hardship. What they are looking to do is extend the TVC zone and then tweak the regulations. This is an opportunity to start it at this point and see how it works.
Commissioner Gregory stated when he lived at 71 Windsor Street, he got a grant to redo his whole house. He spent over $40,000 to redo the house and right now his step daughter lives in the house. He sold it in 1987. He knows the area very well and stated it is conducive to multi-family homes.
Mr. Froment stated they are not looking to be landlords. They are looking for the first time home buyer. He discussed the house layout further and asked where he should go from here.
Mr. Giner stated he will come up with a regulation and present it to the Commission formally. He wanted to make sure the he was not wasting his time on this.
APPLICATIONS TO BE RECEIVED
Public Hearings:
PH#2691 – Special Use Permit for grocery beer license at an existing convenience store located at 565 Enfield Street in a Business Local (BL) District, Map 33, Lot 274, Shah Bakul, Applicant; Saloneel LLC, Owner.
Mr. Giner stated this is a convenience store and they want to be able to sell beer in the convenience store. Commissioner Lefakis stated it is located across from the American Legion. Mr. Giner stated they previously applied for a full liquor license and they failed to show for a couple of meetings and the Commission denied their application. Mr. Giner stated they just want to be able to sell beer out of a cooler.
A public hearing is tentatively scheduled for March 4, 2010 unless it can be Legal noticed sooner.
Site Plans:
SPR#1456.02 – Modification of Plans previously approved to allow a storage shed behind the building under construction at 168 Elm Street in a Business Local (BL) District, Map 57, Lot 316, Five Guy’s Burgers & Fries, Applicant/Owner.
Mr. Giner presented a picture of the proposed shed for Five Guy’s Burgers & Fries. Mr. Giner showed the location of the shed on the site plan. He stated it probably won’t be seen from the road. John Cabibbo asked for a letter from the engineer indicating that the basin was designed to hold the added runoff. Commissioner Lefakis asked if this would be on a slab. Mr. Giner stated it would be on gravel with blocks. Klotter Farms comes in and prepares the ground for you. Mr. Giner stated they have noticed they are having storage issues and they have a need for this shed. It will be for paper storage. Chairman Duren stated if it is just for paper, does the Health Department have to get involved. Mr. Giner stated he did not believe so. Following additional discussion, Commissioner Ladd made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Dumont, to allow Mr. Giner to administratively approve SPR#1456.02 for Five Guy’s Burgers & Fries. The motion was approved by a 5 – 0 – 0 vote.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Gregory made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Dumont, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Peter Falk, Secretary
Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission
jmr
|