|
ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 17, 2004
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Thursday, June 17, 2004 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman DiPace called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Anthony DiPace, Chairman
Charles Duren
Robert Egan
James Hickey, Jr.
Nicles Lefakis, Alternate
Kathleen Sarno, Alternate
Samuel McGill, Alternate
ALSO PRESENT: Jose Giner, Director of Planning
MINUTES
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Egan, to approve the Minutes of May 20, 2004. The Minutes were approved by a 6 - 0 - 1 vote. Alternate Samuel McGill abstained.
CORRESPONDENCE
Chairman DiPace noted receipt of a letter from Anocoil requesting that their application be added to tonight's agenda. Commissioner Hickey made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Duren, to add an item to tonight's agenda under Old Business, item b. for Anocoil. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Mr. Giner noted receipt of a letter from Attorney Susan Hays concerning the Enfield Commons plaza on Hazard Avenue. They would like to change the colors of the entire plaza to the same colors as Barnes and Noble. Chairman DiPace requested a picture to see what the plaza will look like.
Mr. Giner stated at State Line Plaza, there was a request to have everything looking similar to Dick's store front color scheme.
Mr. Giner will request that the applicants for the above color changes appear at the July 8, 2004 meeting to describe the changes to the Commission.
Chairman DiPace stated Correspondence also includes a wetlands permit for Anocoil, Inland Wetlands information and a letter regarding Tri State Diesel.
COMMISSIONERS' CORRESPONDENCE
Chairman DiPace received a phone call from a gentleman regarding the Riverview Shops and a possible change in their sign which does not meet the ordinance requirements. Chairman DiPace discussed this request with Mr. Alsbaugh and he asked him to look into what could be done to allow these types of signs while also protecting the town. Mr. Giner stated the area is all zoned Residential. Even if it were zoned commercial, that type of signage would not be permitted because it is a directory sign. Mr. Giner stated any change would have to be applied to the entire town. Chairman DiPace suggested that signs can be controlled by zones. Mr. Giner stated there would have to be a significant reason why a sign would be allowed in one zone and not another. Chairman DiPace asked that Mr. Giner explore available signage options to respond to this request.
Mr. Giner submitted to the Commission prior to the start of the meeting a first draft regarding the amendment to allow awnings in Thompsonville. He asked that Commission members communicate any changes to him.
Chairman DiPace referred to a recent article in The Hartford Courant entitled "Blinded by the Light." He asked if the town's regulations meet the guidelines mentioned in this article. Mr. Giner stated the intensity of some of the lights that are allowed under canopies exceeds these guidelines. He noted the tendency is for businesses to use lighting for signs rather than security especially in the case of gasoline stations.
Chairman DiPace stated recently residents were concerned about lighting from such businesses going into their yards. Mr. Giner stated CL&P has begun to market floodlights. He noted they must be shielded down. Mr. Giner will review the ordinance regarding lighting due to the recent complaints regarding lighting abutting residential areas.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Continued from May 6, 2004
PH#2432 - Text Amendment to Zoning Regulations to allow A-frame signs under limited circumstances in Business General and Business Local Districts, Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission initiative.
Commissioner Duren asked if there have been any recent infractions that would require this amendment to the ordinance. Mr. Giner stated he was not aware of any recent complaints.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public. No one spoke in favor or against this application. Chairman DiPace discussed the reaction of the Zoning Enforcement Officer to this proposed text amendment. He added that no one has shown up to support this amendment.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to withdraw PH#2432. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - CONTINUED FROM June 3, 2004 Meeting
PH#2433 - Application for Special Use Permit to operate a private heliport pad at 132 Moody Road, zoned Industrial-1, Map 93, Lot 18, Alexander K. and Maurine D. Chickosky, Owner/Applicant. (Must close by June 17, 2004)
Attorney Fatima Lobo, Dana Steele of J. R. Russo, and Charles Weber, the helicopter operator, appeared before the Commission regarding this application. Mr. Chickosky, the owner and applicant, was also present.
Chairman DiPace read letters in opposition to the proposed heliport and the spraying of the fields from Evelyn Macala, 6 Winter Way, Diane Spazzarini, 17 Winter Way and Donna Boski, 7 Misty Meadow.
Chairman DiPace reiterated to the audience that this is not an application about spraying but about a proposed heliport. The Commission has no say regarding the spraying and it is controlled by the State DEP.
Attorney Lobo repeated the comment that this is not about spraying. Mr. John Hankins of Fuss & O'Neil is present and will speak about the compliance of Enfield Shade Tobacco. Bob Kovach of Fuss and O'Neil is also present to speak to the potential decrease of flight time if this Commission should approve a heliport in this location. He has documented flight time for the purpose of delivering chemicals to the locations.
Attorney Lobo stated this application is not about flying for the purpose of delivering pesticides but it is a question of when, how long and from what location the take-offs and landings are going to occur.
Attorney Lobo stated tonight she distributed some background information regarding the operation of the helicopter and its muffler system. She noted she provided an email dated June 6, 2004 which states the decibel level at different points between flyover and take-off for a Jet Ranger Helicopter or a corporate type of helicopter. There is also a letter dated June 17, 2004 from Northeast Helicopters Flight Services LLC which gives decibel information for the helicopter that will be used with the identified muffler system. Attorney Lobo noted the information will show that this helicopter is actually quieter than the normal corporate helicopter.
Dana Steele of J. R. Russo noted the Commission has received a revised set of plans which he hopes will address the questions and requests for additional information that were raised at the last hearing. This property is located at 132 Moody Road. The property is surrounded by a larger parcel that is a different entity but which the applicant also owns. The parcel before the Commission is 2.3 acres. Sheet 2 of the plans shows the location of the proposed heliport pad.
Mr. Steele stated along with the heliport pad, there is a proposed above-ground steel storage tank. Information on that tank was submitted at the last meeting. The location is the same. The heliport pad is identified by markers in the ground which are flush to the ground and they are noted on the plan.
Mr. Steele stated the plan also shows the approach and take-off paths for the pad. The blue color shows the primary take-off pad. The FAA regulations recommend a secondary approach to account for differences in wind patterns. The orange on the site plan shows the secondary area.
Mr. Steele stated page 3 shows a plan view and profile of the primary and secondary flight paths. It is information that is required by the FAA to demonstrate that there are no obstructions within that flight path. It was brought to their attention at the last meeting that the Commission would like to have an updated land use map of the area. They have updated the plan with the most recent streets in the area and they have also submitted aerial photos of the surrounding area. He presented the plan showing updated information regarding the street patterns. The area to the southwest shows the Misty Meadow development and the area across the other side of North Maple Street known as High Meadow Lane and South Meadow Lane.
Mr. Steele stated the primary take-off heads in an easterly direction away from most of the residential development. It was brought up at the last meeting that there is a new residential development proposed on the east side of Taylor Road. The new areas are shown on the aerial photos they have submitted.
Mr. Steele stated the flight path is a 4,000' path and it is the minimum altitude that is required by the FAA for landing and take-off. The helicopter can take off and elevate much more quickly than that but that is what the FAA has for a guideline. Once the helicopter reaches a height of 500', it is no longer considered to be landing or taking off. That is the limit the FAA requires for any type of analysis regarding obstructions.
Mr. Steele noted the plans identify the obstructions which include the telephone poles on Park Street, and the microwave dish and cell tower which are actually located outside of the flight path. The plan demonstrates that there are no obstructions for either the primary or the secondary approach and take-off path. The secondary path has been curved away from the significant residential development.
Mr. Steele stated the Commission requested information regarding altitudes. That information is now shown on the plan.
Mr. Steele stated the aerial photos were received today and he submitted a set for the record. The first plan is the large area map which was flown at 3,000'. It shows most of the town and all the surrounding neighborhoods. The second photo is a close-up photo showing the primary approach which runs in an easterly direction and also the secondary approach. The limit of the 4,000' is just past the third building and the Taylor Road development is well past that. Mr. Steele pointed out the location of the proposed heliport on this photo as well as Misty Meadow and High Meadow Lane. He noted the secondary path is curved away to an area that is mostly fields and industrial uses.
Mr. Steele stated other changes to the plans include the addition of a note regarding storm water management and maintenance as requested along with a detail of the hooded outlet. That detail is shown on Sheet 1.
Robert Kovach of Fuss & O'Neil discussed flight information. He noted during their inspections of the spraying operation on behalf of DEP, they recorded the times they began and ended the application of the pesticides including the flight time between the loads of material. At the end of the season they tabulated the flight times for each of those events. He presented spread sheets for 2001 through 2003. What is indicated on the tables is in the first year when the operation originated out of the fields, they flew a total of thirteen and a half hours with 175 loads of material. That calculates to approximately five minutes per load. In the second and third years, they flew 25 hours and only completed 94 loads. They doubled the time it took and did half the work. There was a similar trend in the 2003 season. These tables were provided to the DEP and Mr. Chickosky and they include a column which summarizes the flight times.
Commissioner Duren asked if the 94 loads convert to 94 landings and take-offs. Mr. Kovach stated yes but the total times on the table do not include the initial flight to and from each field.
Commissioner Egan asked if it is required on the DEP permit that they maintain an altitude of 500' over residential areas. Mr. Kovach stated he believes that is an FAA requirement.
Commissioner Egan stated they are required to maintain a 500' altitude over residential areas and avoid any of the buffer areas around the residential areas He has a problem to see how this is beneficial to the town when the take-offs and landings are going to create more noise than having to maintain the DEP limits away from the residential area.
Attorney Lobo stated the DEP limits on buffers have to do with the actual spraying of pesticides. The take-offs and landings have to do with how much pesticide you have to deliver. The flight time has to do with where you are coming from and they are independent. The buffer zones exist regardless of take-off from anywhere.
Commissioner Egan stated his point is the requirement to fly at a 500' altitude creates less noise than 45 or 50 take-offs and landings which create higher decibels and more noise to the neighborhoods. Saying there will be fewer flyovers does not necessarily mean it is going to be beneficial to the neighborhoods. There will be more intensive flight time in those neighborhoods.
Mr. Kovach stated the actual application of the material over the field isn't done at 500'. Commissioner Egan stated according to the DEP permit, they cannot fly at a lesser altitude than 500' above a residential area. Attorney Lobo stated the 500' is an FAA regulation. Commissioner Egan stated that 500' level would protect the neighborhoods.
Attorney Lobo stated they have chosen the primary approach area because it is not over residential. They will have to go through the state and federal process if they are successful here. Regarding the primary approach area, when you reach 500' at 4,000' out, it is not over any residential areas.
Attorney Lobo stated they provided information to the Commission tonight on the helicopter and the list of the equipment. They have provided information that shows this is a very quiet helicopter compared to a corporate one. This is an application for a special permit. They have tried to design this in a way that is the least intrusive. The landing area is grass and not paved. They have provided for a primary approach pattern that really does not go over any of the residential areas. Attorney Lobo feels the Commission should approve this application.
Commissioner Egan stated an issue was raised on the decibel information which was provided. One set of data shows flyover and take-off of levels 85.2 for a flyover and 90.7 for a take-off. The applicant submitted a memo from Northeast Helicopter which lists some decibel levels. It doesn't make any reference to take-offs. Commissioner Egan asked about the testing protocol and where is the data to support this information.
Attorney Lobo introduced Charles Weber to respond to the available information regarding the helicopter.
Commissioner Egan stated the Commission specifically asked for the spec sheet on that helicopter. Attorney Lobo stated that has been provided. Commissioner Egan stated the decibel level has not been provided other than the sheet that doesn't show any supporting testing data.
Charles Weber stated the decibel reading was done with a hand held measuring device. The numbers that were read off the decibel reader were read by this gentleman's employee who is a prominent businessman in Ellington. While it is not a $15,000 test, it gives a fairly accurate reading.
Charles Weber stated on Tuesday they did six loads of material on the Route 190 blocks. They did those out of Ellington Airport and it took approximately two and a half hours. If he had done this like he does everywhere else in the country, including Suffield, he would have brought his helicopter to the site and those three fields would have taken him about thirty-five minutes. He also would not have crossed Mr. Chickosky's property line in the process of spraying.
Mr. Weber stated the heliport will greatly benefit him in cutting down his flying time and it will greatly benefit the community regarding how much he is going over Mr. Chickosky's property line.
Commissioner Egan asked if the heliport would only be used to do the fields located in Enfield and not Somers and Ellington. Mr. Weber stated if the Commission would allow him to work out of the field like everywhere else, this would help everyone tremendously. He has proof and Fuss & O'Neil has provided information that his flying time will be cut seventy percent.
Mr. Weber stated on Wednesday, they did two loads of material on Mr. Chickosky's home farm where they are trying to put this heliport. That job took him almost one hour to do. If he was at Ken's property, he would have done his property in twelve minutes and never left his property line. When you talk about decibel levels, on the 190 blocks there is a huge subdivision just to the west. His decibel level when he is down spraying and working on the field is cut down dramatically because it is going through the lids. Taking off and flying away brings all that noise down to the houses. When he does Christian Farms across the river, Mr. Weber goes to their field, does the work and puts the helicopter back on the trailer.
Commissioner Egan asked if Mr. Weber would only spray the fields in Enfield and not fly to Somers or Ellington. Mr. Weber stated if Somers lets him do the 190 blocks landing at the field like he does in Suffield, New Jersey and many other states, he would not fly out of Ken's property unless it was an emergency. He would only fly out of Ken's property to move his helicopter. He wouldn't do any fields if he could land. The last thing he wants to do is go from Ken's house even to the 190 block. His mix station is at Ellington Airport. He would have one at 190 and one at Ken's and the flying time would be cut down tremendously. Mr. Weber stated he wants to do the right thing for the community.
Mr. Giner noted receipt of a signed petition from Lauren and Lee Garrity, 10 Winter Way, in opposition similar to the previous ones submitted.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public.
Margaret Jedziniak, Abbe Road, stated she is in favor of Mr. Chickosky having the heliport. The purpose of this hearing is the concern about safety regarding the number of times this helicopter flies over neighborhoods and it has nothing to do with spraying. It would be safer for the helicopter being in Enfield rather than flying out of Ellington where there are a greater number of residents who will be affected by the helicopter flying longer distances. Ms. Jedziniak stated none of the people in her area have been alerted to this.
Ms. Jedziniak stated two of Enfield's Council people were here and appeared. She doesn't think that they should have appeared for certain people. She read from the ordinance regarding Appearances which states "no public official shall appear on behalf of any private person other than himself, his spouse, parents or minor children before any town agency, board or commission; however, a member of the Town Council may appear before town agencies, boards or commissions on behalf of its constituents in the course of his duties as a representative of the electorate or in the performance of public or civic obligations." Ms. Jedziniak stated Mr. Chickosky has a farm that has been in his family for three generations and he has a right to run it. His livelihood should not be taken away from him. Ms. Jedziniak added if the heliport is not given to Mr. Chickosky and the flights will be coming over her home, she intends to alert the residents before this hearing is over and let them know what is forthcoming. She will ask the Town Council members that did appear for other people that they appear for these residents.
Jack Sheridan, Buchanan Road, agreed with Ms. Jedziniak. He noted from a risk point of view, the pilot makes a good recommendation that he fly off the fields. Mr. Sheridan's other concern is the taxpayers of Enfield are spending extra money to send students to agricultural schools and now the Commission may possibly deny a man who has been making his living in the agricultural business a right to continue. Mr. Sheridan stated his property abuts Mr. Jarmoc's property and he has used Fixed Wing aircraft to spray his property. He felt it would be a better alternative to use a helicopter at the property rather than to be flying over the residential areas when it is not necessary. In response to a comment from Chairman DiPace, Mr. Sheridan noted that Mr. Jarmoc has not been spraying for approximately three years.
Angela Zarnicki, 16 Winter Way, stated her property backs up to the Moody Road Enfield Shade Tobacco property. She noted her concern is it is very loud. Two years ago while she was in her backyard, she thought she was under an air raid. She took some pictures because the helicopter was so close. She was terrified and it was very loud. The helicopter was not supposed to be flying in that area and was inside the buffer. She stated this is someone that has the potential to make it very uncomfortable for her and at 5:00 a.m. it is very loud when the helicopter flies. She urged the Commission not to grant this permit and presented her pictures to them.
Al Kershane, 460 Hazard Avenue, stated he is in favor of the heliport. In his opinion, it is the best alternative. He has lived in this area since the 1940's and has seen tobacco sprayed many different ways. He feels the helicopter is the best method for spraying. He further noted this family has been farming this property for three generations. Mr. Kershane did not see any reason why Mr. Chickosky cannot put in a heliport. Flying from Ellington is more dangerous than if the helicopter were located on the home site. As far as the noise factor, it is not any worse than when the tractors were used in the 1950's with their sprayers. In the late 1950's single engine planes used to fly right over the power lines. Mr. Kershane stated the people coming into the community should have realized they are near an agricultural area. Mr. Kershane also spoke in support of Mr. Chickosky.
Peter Fontaine, 18 Winter Way, stated he is not in favor of the heliport pad. The applicant has stated they were before the Commission because of the spraying but did not mention lift-offs. 94 flights were mentioned. Mr. Fontaine stated there is a need to consider if this is good for Enfield. He is in favor of having a business and growing to a maximum capacity but perhaps in another form or another way. Mr. Fontaine stated the neighbors are concerned with the pesticide. They are also concerned with the noise but there should be a concern regarding the amount of take-offs. He asked if the mechanism used to do the decibel readings was calibrated. Mr. Fontaine offered a solution to have them do a fly over and have the Commission see how close they come to these fields. The flights are also done very early and are very loud. He suggested the applicant use other options like spraying of pesticide under the nets.
Lee Garrity, 10 Winter Way, stated he abuts the field off Moody Road right next to Hawthorne's. He has been there since the beginning of this tobacco issue. He noted sometimes tobacco is sprayed five times per day and he cannot imagine a helicopter going by as often as that. They have tried to have Mr. Chickosky come to some of their meetings years back and he chose not to come. Mr. Garrity stated he is definitely against this proposed heliport.
David Stopinsky, 20 High Meadow Lane, stated his main concern with all these take-offs and approaches is safety. He asked if the town is prepared for containing this type of spraying material should there be an accident in a residential neighborhood. He has not heard the applicant explain how the children of Enfield will be protected should there be an accident. Mr. Stopinsky stated when he moved here, there was not a helicopter pad in his backyard. He does not want one now. Mr. Stopinsky stated the helicopter uses a different form of fuel. He would like his concerns addressed.
Lisa Rogers, 8 Winter Way, stated she abuts the property on Moody Road and she is concerned about safety. The helicopter flies very low. It does a turn around at the end of her street. While the helicopter may be 500' at that point, it is not 500' from her and her children on their backyard swing. If the helicopter has an accident, what happens? Ms. Rogers stated when she first moved here, there was no tobacco but a different type of farming. She did not buy into a helicopter flying over her backyard. Ms. Rogers stated she is a PTO President at Hazardville Memorial and this year with the Parks and Recreation program, there will be many children walking to Fermi during the day. She is also concerned about their safety.
Ms. Rogers stated she has talked to people who abutted Jarmoc Farms in the past and Mr. Jarmoc let the people know what he was spraying and asked for their approval in the past. That has not happened here. She further discussed the impact of the helicopter on her property and the fact that she is not enjoying the private use of her property.
Tom Osborne, 9 South Meadow Lane, submitted a petition with 271 signatures. The petition reads: "We, the undersigned residents of Enfield, want to express our opposition to the special use permit to operate a private heliport at 132 Moody Road, zoned Industrial, Map 93, Lot 18, Alex K. and Maurine D. Chickowsky, Owner/Applicant. Our reasons are the following but not limited to: noise, hours of operation, safety of flying over residential areas, potential hazards related to chemicals, potential environmental impact related to spills or accidents."
Jill Osborne, 9 South Meadow Lane, stated when they purchased their property, they had a tree farm behind them and a very considerate farmer who does ground spraying which is not loud or intrusive. This is what she bought into and not a helicopter spraying fields. This took anyone that bought into neighborhoods abutting agricultural areas by surprise. Ms. Osborne stated if the applicant would utilize ground spraying, there would be no decibel problems whatsoever.
Robert Welch, 135 Moody Road, stated he and his wife have witnessed many helicopter flights during the last few years. They are convinced that this helicopter is very, very noisy. Also, if this application is approved, and they hope it is not, there would be too much air traffic in their residential areas.
Attorney Lobo stated this is about a heliport and not spraying. This business has been in Enfield for several generations. There are several layers of safety. There is the FAA procedure which they still have to go through as well as the state requirements. The applicant also has to comply with the town's noise regulations. There are police powers at different levels, federal, state and local, to assure that they are complying. They will comply with those and they believe their presentation shows that they will be complying with those decibel levels and the applicant is limiting this to farming. Attorney Lobo reiterated this is not about the spraying. The public has available to them all the information they are required to provide to the DEP.
Commissioner Duren stated in looking at the proposal, there are no limitations regarding the hours when they can use this heliport. He felt 5:00 a.m. or 6:00 a.m. in a residential area is a concern.
Attorney Lobo stated what they had proposed was that the Commission consider tying the hours of operation to daylight hours. Whatever the Commission finds reasonable, they will comply. They are not proposing lighting and they had requested that the limitation be from dawn to dusk with a possible stipulation of a half hour after or a half hour before. Another option would be to use a bright line test which would be just a time.
Commissioner Duren felt this would leave it too wide open. He mentioned possible picnics in the neighborhood and how the helicopter spraying might affect them.
Attorney Lobo stated the Commission can impose times and it is within their discretion to do so. Some discussion followed regarding a stipulation of a certain time after dawn and before dusk.
Commissioner Duren stated the applicant has to understand people's feelings on spraying. Attorney Lobo is saying the DEP has all the information. Commissioner Duren suggested the applicant inform the public of what they are using and how they are using it which would alleviate some fears.
Commissioner Duren noted things that used to be okay have since been found not to be and he cited EDB. Attorney Lobo stated the problem is how to inform every person in the area. Commissioner Duren stated the fields were not used for many years and when Misty Meadow was developed, they were not using that field for tobacco. Attorney Lobo noted the need for farmland to rest. Her point was that there is oversight by the DEP and State of Connecticut and they do not operate in a vacuum. There are regulations, oversight, protocols in place, and safety measures at all levels. There is a DEP level on the spraying. The Town of Enfield does have regulations in place.
Commissioner Duren stated they took lead out of gasoline because it was harmful. Now they have taken MTBE out. Both of those were supposedly safe. He asked if someone could sit down with the neighborhood and explain what they are using when spraying.
Attorney Lobo stated they have no problem providing all the information that is available. There have been other forums where they have tried to address this. The problem is to try to take this forum to where the focus should be. She added she also brought with her tonight people from Fuss & O'Neil.
Commissioner Egan stated Attorney Lobo referred to having to comply with the town noise ordinance. He noted that agricultural uses are exempt from the noise ordinance so there would be no control of how much noise is generated. Commissioner Egan stated the Commission has to look at what the site requirements are and the guidelines as to what the Commission allows to pass and the conditions that are assigned to it. The only protection these people are going to have is with this Commission right now and only this Commission can address their concerns and make sure that those concerns are reflected in the special permit.
Commissioner Egan stated the other issue with DEP is they are under staffed and overworked. To rely on them to enforce the regulations to a maximum is not something that the town can rely on. The town has their own regulations and their own protections.
Commissioner Egan stated the simple question is there were agreements not to do any flying in the fields behind Winter Way. There were going to be manual tractor applications made. Whether that agreement is in place now, Commissioner Egan does not know. An audience member submitted a copy of this prior agreement to the Commission. Commissioner Egan questioned if that was a reasonable and satisfactory way of spraying by using a tractor. He noted there are only three spraying applications in the entire State of Connecticut and he questioned why Mr. Chickosky has to be an exception. Commissioner Egan asked for an explanation or that the Attorney offer another alternative.
Attorney Lobo stated regarding the regulations, there are those adopted by the Town of Enfield. The FAA regulations provide protection because they dictate the size of the helicopter and that to some extent controls the noise level. A larger heliport would be able to handle a larger helicopter.
Attorney Lobo stated as far as the DEP is concerned, it was the DEP who started the whole issue of not using other types of aircraft to spray. She disagreed about them being understaffed and not monitoring because there are very stringent reporting requirements.
Attorney Lobo stated she has not seen this agreement and would need to see it before offering a response. She noted the agreement talks about spraying and added that aerial spraying is the most cost efficient and best way to spray this product. It is a business decision to do it in the manner which is allowable. The question is where the take-offs and landings will occur. This is not about spraying which will occur.
Attorney Lobo read the prior agreement from the Winter Way residents at this time.
Angela Zarnicki, 16 Winter Way, stated she brought a copy of the bill, #5530, because it proves their protection from the Moody Road Enfield Shade Tobacco site. She had an incident two years ago when the applicant was in violation of the law and it frightened all the residents that he broke the law. It is very admirable that his counselor is assuring them that he will abide by the law but when everyone is gone and the residents are left, they are at his mercy. In answer to this bill, Mr. Chickosky wrote a letter stating that he would abide by that bill and he never has. He did not in 2002. Ms. Zarnicki has a picture of Governor Rowland signing this bill. She also has a few of her neighbors here who stood up to get that bill enforced.
Attorney Lobo stated this is Public Act #98-171 which is substitute House Bill #5530 signed into law June 4. It appears that her client was exercising his first amendment rights and wrote to Senator Daly, the Chairman of the Environment Commission. He expressed some of his concerns but it is in no way an agreement and it is not signed by all parties with a proposal of what will be done. In a quick reading of it, it appears to be a letter dated April 22, 1998. This is prior to a lot of the events that have caused her client to have to move off-site and out of the Town of Enfield. The circumstances that were in place in 1998 when her client wrote this letter to Senator Daly are no longer in place. That has affected how he does business and how the spraying occurs. Attorney Lobo stated she has not seen the pictures that were presented to the Commission.
Attorney Lobo stated it is her client's belief that he is against the House Bill that was ultimately passed. It is his expression of concern that if this bill was passed, it would have a negative effect on his business and agriculture in the State of Connecticut. It is not an agreement.
Mr. Weber defended himself on the photographs that were taken and presented to the Commission. Every application that they do in the State of Connecticut is downloaded with a GPS that shows where the machine turned on, where it turned off and his flight plan. All around every one of Ken's properties that he does not have signatures on is a 200' plus buffer. Mr. Weber assured the Commission about what he has to fax DEP every time he does an application and if he goes over a buffer zone, he calls Brad Robinson immediately. If there is a buffer zone there and his helicopter barely pokes out of it in a turn, it can be seen on his print out. Mr. Weber did not feel the Commission should spend a lot of time being concerned about this aspect.
Regarding the community and how to protect the children, Mr. Weber thought he stated that pretty clearly. He is present because he is the spray man and this is really about the heliport. He would love to meet with someone and determine the best way to do this. Mr. Weber noted if someone wants to be educated why this way is so much better than doing it by ground, he asked that they spend some time with him or go to the Connecticut River test station where they did tests on Ken's property by order of the DEP for three years. They have all the drift tests and this is unbiased material. If the public is concerned about spraying, there are a lot of things they can do to ease their problems. Mr. Weber stated the material in the picture is a fungicide and not even a poison. Very rarely or approximately eighty percent of the time, Ken is not putting on a poison but a fungicide to fight blue mold.
David Stopinsky, 20 High Meadow Lane, stated the Attorney has stated how her client wants to follow the law and regulations. However, on September 11, they were aerial spraying. Not a plane was supposed to be in the air. Mr. Stopinsky and five other people called and reported him for having that plane in the air on 9/11. That is the precedent he set regarding following the rules.
Lee Garrity, 10 Winter Way, stated he has been involved in this tobacco issue since it started. He adjoins the Hawthorne property. They had a garage meeting once with a DEP member present. They were asking him if there was a way he could monitor what is being put in and how often regarding the chemicals they were using. His response was there was no way possible that they could do that. At that time there were only two DEP members for the entire state. There have been many different crops back there but the tobacco is very high maintenance. It has gotten to a point where it is aggravating to the neighbors. They have had to clean their home windows from the overspray and put up with the smell.
Lisa Rogers, 8 Winter Way, stated the Town is going for self insurance and she asked if having this heliport in town was presented to the Council so that they know whether or not they should be going in that direction. The definition of an accident is something that is unforeseen. There is more of a possibility for an accident to happen with the heliport.
Ms. Rogers asked if percentages have been presented regarding take-offs and landings. Also, at the heliport, how is she assured as a resident that it is in compliance with how many take-offs and landings there are going to be or that these take-offs and landings are only for Enfield's usage. Who will be monitoring this and who is requesting the flights to be taken? Are they going to be flying to other farms out of town?
Chairman DiPace stated he did not think legally the Commission can condition this to state they can only fly in the Town of Enfield.
Ms. Rogers stated with a special permit, the helicopter could be taking off 100 times a day. She emphasized she is opposed to this heliport.
Frank Jedziniak, Abbe Road, a lifetime resident of Enfield, stated if there is a choice between coming from Ellington or to have a heliport at Chickosky's, he is in favor of the heliport.
Sharon Hart, 9 Misty Meadow Road, stated eight years ago she and her husband lived in East Hartford. They came to Enfield because it was a place where there would be lower flight traffic from airplanes. They decided on Misty Meadow, there were no airplanes and it was a quiet and friendly neighborhood. A few years ago Bradley added a take-off runway which increased the air traffic. She is against having the heliport in her back yard.
Margaret Jedziniak, Abbe Road, stated she is in favor of the heliport because she doesn't see why the path of the helicopter should be moved from one neighborhood to another. It will now be her neighborhood that will get the brunt of this helicopter. Chairman DiPace stated Ms. Jedziniak will get flights over her neighborhood either way. Ms. Jedziniak stated she is talking about the helicopter coming from Ellington Airport. If the heliport was at the Chickosky farm, they could take off from there. Further discussion between Chairman DiPace and Ms. Jedziniak followed regarding the air traffic patterns.
Jill Osborne stated she feels like the residents are being sold a bill of goods. It has already been determined that take-offs and landings are louder than cruising. She questioned how 94 take-offs and landings will not be disruptive to the neighborhood.
Al Kershane, 460 Hazard Avenue, stated he is still in favor of Mr. Chickosky having a heliport. The only thing he would be against is if he did have a heliport pad and used it for his personal use other than business. The heliport should only be for his business use only.
Chairman DiPace stated this public hearing has a mandatory closing date of tonight but he has received all this information presented tonight by Attorney Lobo which he has not had a chance to read. Following some discussion with Mr. Giner regarding procedure, Mr. Giner recommended the applicant request an extension of this hearing.
Attorney Lobo presented a written request for an extension of this application until July 22, 2004.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Sarno, to accept the extension request for PH#2433 to July 22, 2004. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
This public hearing was continued to July 22, 2004.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - NEW
PH#2450 - Special Use Permit for the unmerger of lots to allow the creation of an additional building lot at 41-43 Belmont Avenue, zoned R-33, Map 38, Lot 58, David Karat, Owner/Applicant. (Must close by July 8, 2004).
David Karat, 71 Laurel Street, appeared before the Commission regarding this application. He requested approval from the Commission to unmerge a lot at 41-43 Belmont Avenue.
Commissioner Duren asked if this lot was ever used for anything other than what it is presently used for and did it have a garage. Mr. Karat stated to his knowledge it was open land. There is also a separate deed for this property. Mr. Giner stated there was a shed on this property. Mr. Karat stated there was a shed that belonged to the building that he owns next door but that shed was moved.
Commissioner Duren asked if there are two homes on this lot. Mr. Karat stated the lot on the right is the lot in question. On the lot to the left, there is a house in the front and a house in the back. Commissioner Duren stated that means there will be three houses on this one lot if this is passed. He questioned where the parking for three homes will occur.
Mr. Karat stated there is a similar situation one street over.
Commissioner Duren stated right now there is a dirt driveway and there are a lot of cars on the property. Mr. Karat stated while he does not personally live there, his family lives in the front and in the back. All the vehicles were not part of those houses. He had some of his work vehicles there.
Commissioner Duren stated that still does not answer where the parking will occur.
Commissioner Egan stated it doesn't meet the 10' separation and the porch is on the right of way. Mr. Giner stated the porch is existing. The new line shown on the plan confirms the distance to be 9'6". Mr. Karat stated the surveyor had recalculated that and measured it at 10'. Mr. Karat stated he did not receive a written statement from his surveyor confirming this.
Commissioner Duren asked if the existing homes are single-family homes and Mr. Karat confirmed that they are three-bedroom single-family homes.
Chairman DiPace requested that Mr. Giner research this property and determine why the two homes were built in this manner.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public.
Shannon Nicewater, 47 Belmont Avenue, stated she abuts this property. She also resides against the Liquori house which has been split into two lots. Regarding the lot with the two houses with one fronting the street and one behind it, at one point they shared a double driveway. Now the driveway has been removed. Her concerns are the parking issue, the congestion and traffic. For privacy reasons and reasons of the homeowner next door, she feels it would decrease the value of her property because the home would be that close. She doesn't feel it is large enough to put a house there facing the road. The home would have to be located sideways and the occupants would be looking into the back of her home.
Chairman DiPace asked for a confirmation that the driveway was removed. Ms. Nicewater stated it was a double driveway and it was removed.
Chairman DiPace continued this public hearing to July 8, 2004. Chairman DiPace asked that Mr. Giner look into whether this driveway was removed. Mr. Giner stated the town has records from the 1993 flyover.
PH#2394.02 - Special Use Permit to allow four electronic amusement devices at a previously approved Red Robin Restaurant at 25 Hazard Avenue, zoned BR, Map 45, Lot 8, Red Robin LLC, Applicant/SEA Enfield Commons, LLC, Owner.
Attorney Susan Hays and Tom Collins representing Red Robin Restaurant appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Attorney Hays stated they are before the Commission to seek a special permit. The regulations allow up to two amusement machines without any special type of permitting. They are proposing to have four amusement machines at the proposed Red Robin Restaurant at 25 Hazard Avenue.
Attorney Hays stated the types of machines that they intend to have are similar to what they have in Manchester. These would be two video games and two plush crane machines. They propose to locate these machines inside the front door to the left. The area is a small area and the machines are 34" out from the wall. One of the plush cranes is 42" wide and the other is 60" wide. The video game machines are 34" out from the wall and 24" high. There will also be a person present at all times because the machines are in view of the hostess station. This evening in Manchester there were three people in view of these machines. The curved areas shown on the plan are seating areas for people waiting to be seated. Attorney Hays emphasized that this is not an area where people would come just for the purpose of playing video games.
Attorney Hays presented a sign affidavit to Mr. Giner.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public. No one spoke in favor or against this application. Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve PH#2394.02, a special use permit to allow four electronic amusement devices at a previously approved Red Robin restaurant at 25 Hazard Avenue. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
OLD BUSINESS
SPR#1266 - Application to remove existing Nailite Panels, replace the damaged and fallen brickwork on Church Street side (west side), replace enclosed entrance on the Alden Avenue side with two windows, put up two awnings over the two entrance doors on Alden Avenue, repair existing rear stairs and enclose the open upper porch at 4 Alden Avenue (Old Polish National Home), zoned TV, Map 27, Lot 99, Jan Fijolek, Applicant/Owner.
Jan Fijolek appeared before the Commission regarding this application. He stated he plans to remove the existing Nailite panels and replace them with an alternate material. He presented samples of the materials that will be used and stated the intent is to return the building to the way it was prior to the panels being installed. He presented wood material painted red with white trim to the Commission.
Mr. Fijolek stated regarding the enclosure of the entrance on Alden Avenue, he would like to install one window rather than two due to the narrowness of the area. The one window would have the same aluminum sash to match the other windows.
Mr. Fijolek stated a further proposal is the addition of the dark red awning. The reason it is a dark red is because the color will fade and eventually get lighter. There will be two awnings, one on the entrance door and one on the exit door.
Mr. Fijolek stated another proposal is the porch. Years ago, they put on siding of the same color as proposed. He would like to enclose the porch because of the nearness of this building to a residential apartment and to confine any noise from banquet type events. The enclosed porch would also be utilized by those smoking.
Mr. Fijolek stated the final request is for tile. He presented granite tile that would match one of the existing tiles. There are different tiles on the building and the granite tile proposed would match the brick and the existing trim.
In response to a question from Commissioner McGill, Mr. Fijolek stated the awning may be a little redder than the color picture presented but it will definitely match the brick.
Peter, the staff liaison to the Enfield Revitalization and Strategy Committee, stated Mrs. Fijolek and his son-in-law were in attendance at last week's ERSC meeting. They discussed coming before this Commission in July and it was later changed to June. Therefore, there is nothing in writing about their attendance. He confirmed they did appear and they are trying to comply. Peter stated that the ERSC did not see the colors at their meeting but the Fijolek's are attempting to address the issues. During a discussion that followed regarding how to receive written input from the ERSC, Commissioner Sarno suggested a Committee representative email this Commission.
Mr. Giner stated the Commission has to make a decision and this complies with what the ERSC had advised previously.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve SPR#1266 to remove existing Nailite Panels, replace the damaged and fallen brickwork on the Church Street side (west side), replace enclosed entrance on the Alden Avenue side with two windows, put up two awnings over the two entrance doors on Alden Avenue, repair the existing rear stairs and enclose the open upper porch at 4 Alden Avenue (former Polish National Home building). Approval from the Enfield Revitalization and Strategy Committee is to be included in the record of this application.
Commissioner Hickey stated there appears to have been a breakdown in communication with the Enfield Revitalization and Strategy Committee and this has now been rectified.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
Commissioner Hickey made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Duren, for a recess. Following a 7 - 0 - 0 vote, the Commission recessed at 10:25 p.m. The Commission reconvened at 10:32 p.m.
SPR #1277 - Application to construct a mechanical pad at 230 Shaker Road, Zoned I-1 Map 94, Lot 8, Anocoil, Applicant/Owner.
Dana Steele of J. R. Russo, Alan Seagrave, Jr., and Richard Bombadier, Senior Project Engineer for Anocoil, appeared before the Commission regarding this application. Mr. Steele stated this plan is a slight revision from what was originally submitted. They were before the Wetlands Commission this past Tuesday and they requested alternative locations for the pad. Their conclusion was that they liked Alternative #1. Mr. Steele presented this plan to the Commission tonight. The location of this pad is going to be directly adjacent to the existing mechanical pad which currently houses an existing thermal oxidizer. This new thermal oxidizer will replace the existing one. However, because of the nature of the operations of this facility, they need to have one running at all times.
Richard Bombadier stated he is responsible for the installation, maintenance and operation of this thermal oxidizer which is going to be installed on a concrete pad. Mr. Bombadier explained the use of a thermal oxidizer. They have to convert the solvents they put on to the aluminum plates into water, vapor and carbon dioxide with five percent of the solvents allowed to go into the air. This device is the conversion device which raises the exhaust temperature up to 1350 degrees and holds it there for one to two seconds which allows a heat generating reaction to occur. Their existing unit is over thirteen years old and needs to be repaired. Because the technology has changed significantly, they have decided to replace the unit. Mr. Bombadier went into some detail on the advantages of the new unit and the positive impact it will have on the environment.
Commissioner Egan stated the old unit had some problems with DEP and he is happy to see the unit is being replaced with a more efficient unit. Mr. Bombadier stated about three years ago a neighbor complained and DEP investigated. It is their understanding that a third party told this neighbor that they were actually incinerating liquid and solid industrial waste in this unit. This is untrue. When DEP investigated, they saw this was not the case. These devices are of a special design and there is no way to introduce liquids or solids into them.
Commissioner Egan asked about the requirement from DEP for the emission from this unit. Mr. Bombadier stated their permit requires 95%. The new unit will be at 99% meaning only 1% of the solvents will go into the air.
Mr. Steele stated the Alternate #1 plan presented is revised June 15, 2004 and it says reduce the mechanical pad at Alternate Location #1.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lefakis, to approve SPR#1277, Alternate #1 as revised June 15, 2004, with the standard applicable conditions. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
NEW BUSINESS
SPR#1276 - Application for temporary landing of helicopters during the Town 4th of July Celebration at the Higgins School ball field located on North Main Street in a TVCZ District, Map 28, Lot 113 - 4th of July Town Celebration Committee, applicant, Town of Enfield, Owner.
Dan Post, 10 Cartier Road, appeared before the Commission representing the Fourth of July Committee. They are requesting the ability to land three helicopters at three different times at the A. D. Higgins ball field for entertainment purposes during the fourth of July celebration.
Mr. Giner presented the Commission with a map of the ball field showing where the helicopters would be landing. Mr. Post noted they would be landing in the outfield area.
Commissioner Egan stated there are some activities also going on at the ball field. Mr. Post stated the helicopter would land at 7:00 p.m. and would leave within an hour. The ball field is cleared before the helicopters come in. They land on an empty ball field which is 99% fenced in with a gate.
Commissioner Sarno asked about safety measures. Mr. Post stated each of the pilots do a walk through of the area before the event takes place. Each individual helicopter has its own ground crew. They coordinate their activities with the North Thompsonville Fire Department.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve SPR#1276 for the temporary landing of helicopters during the Town 4th of July Celebration at the Higgins School ball field located on North Main Street. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
BOND RELEASES
SPR#1088 - Request for Engineering Bond Release for Tobacco Valley Teachers Credit Union, 182 South Road, in the amount of $34,305.83.
Commissioner Hickey made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Sarno, to release the engineering bond for SPR#1088 in the amount of $34,305.83. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
OTHER BUSINESS
a. Applications to be received
The following applications were received by the Commission:
PH #2456 - Application for Modification of Plans previously approved for the anticipated placement of temporary classroom trailers (2) at 1264 Enfield Street, Zoned HR-33, Map 19, Lot 68, Town of Enfield, Applicant/Owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled for July 8, 2004.
PH #2457 - Application for a Special Use Permit to unmerge two lots at 138 Windsor Street, Zoned R-33, Map 30, Lot 19, Bob Alaimo, Applicant/Ron Chmura, Owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled for July 22, 2004.
PH #2458 - Application for Special Use Permit for the retail outlet to sell overstock or damaged (packaging) merchandise of skin care products at 7 Moody Rd., Building #2, Unit D, Zoned I-1, Map 75, Lot 37, Jette Rasmussen, Applicant/Denis Lessard, Owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled for July 8, 2004.
SPR #1276 - Application to allow temporary landings and take-offs of helicopters on July 2, July 3 & July 4th as part of the 4th of July Celebration at Higgins School Ball Field on North Main Street, Zoned TVCZ, Map 28, Lot 133, 4th of July Town Celebration Committee, Applicant/Town of Enfield, Owner. - A public hearing will be scheduled for July 8, 2004.
The Commission took action on this application earlier in tonight's agenda.
SPR #1277 - Application to construct a mechanical pad at 230 Shaker Road, Zoned I-1, Map 94, Lot 8, Anocoil, Applicant/Owner.
The Commission took action on this application earlier in tonight's agenda.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Hickey made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Sarno, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
_______________________
Charles Duren, Secretary
Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission
jmr |
|