The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a meeting at the Avon Senior Center on Tuesday July 19, 2011. Present were Duane Starr, Chairman, Douglas Thompson, Vice-Chairman/Secretary, Carol Griffin, Marianne Clark, Peter Mahoney, and Alternates Donald Bonner and Christian Gackstatter. Messrs. Bonner and Gackstatter sat for the meeting. Absent were Linda Keith, David Cappello, and Alternate Elaine Primeau. Also present was Steven Kushner, Director of Planning and Community Development.
Mr. Starr called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Mahoney motioned to approve the June 28, 2011, minutes, as submitted. The motion, seconded by Mrs. Clark, received approval from Messrs. Mahoney, Starr, Thompson, Bonner, and Gackstatter, and Mrs. Clark. Mrs. Griffin abstained, as she was absent from the June 28 meeting but noted that she has read the minutes and is familiar with the content.
PUBLIC HEARING
App. #4550 Old Avon Realty, LLC, owner, Capitol Region Education Council, applicant, request for 2-lot Subdivision, 59 Waterville Road, Parcel 4500059, in an RU2A Zone
App. #4551 Old Avon Realty, LLC, owner, Capitol Region Education Council, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section IV.A.4.b. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit public school, 59 Waterville Road, Parcel 4500059, in an RU2A Zone
Also heard at this time but not part of the public hearing:
App. #4552 Old Avon Realty, LLC, owner, Capitol Region Education Council, applicant, request for Site Plan Approval to permit public school with associated parking, access drives, and play area, 59 Waterville Road, Parcel 4500059, in an RU2A Zone
Mr. Starr announced that the applicant has requested that the public hearing for Apps. #4550 and #4551 be continued to the Commission’s next meeting, scheduled for September, 13. He added that there is also an application pending before the Inland Wetlands Commission (IWC) and this Commission cannot act until a decision is rendered by the IWC.
Mr. Thompson motioned to continue the public hearing for Apps. #4550 and #4551 to the next meeting, scheduled for September 13. The motion, seconded by Mrs. Griffin, received unanimous approval.
App. #4535 Avon Self Storage, LLC/Avon Dreamer, LLC, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VI.H.3.k. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit self storage facility, 190 and 230 Old Farms Road, Parcels 3360190 and 3360230, in I and R40 Zones (proposed zone change to I for Parcel 3360230)
App. #4539 Avon Self Storage, LLC/Avon Dreamer, LLC, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section III.G.4.d.and f. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit filling and regrading in the floodplain, 190 and 230 Old Farms Road, Parcels 3360190 and 3360230, in I and R40 Zones. (proposed zone change to I for Parcel 3360230)
Also heard at this time but not part of the public hearing:
App. #4536 Avon Self Storage, LLC/Avon Dreamer, LLC, owner/applicant, request for Site Plan Approval to permit self storage facility, 190 and 230 Old Farms Road, Parcels 3360190 and 3360230 in I and R40 Zones (proposed zone change to I for Parcel 3360230)
Present to represent these applications were Richard Case, Case & Case PC, representing the applicant; David Whitney, PE, Consulting Engineers, LLC; and Robert Haines, owner.
The public hearing was continued from the June 28 meeting.
Attorney Case reported that the applicant received approval from the Inland Wetlands Commission on July 5. The approval allows for a modification of the existing conservation area as well as the construction of a 12-foot gravel emergency access from Sconsett Point to the current end of the paved road, which is located on property owned by Avon Self Storage. Approval was also granted to construct a fire access for the new building proposed at Avon Self Storage. Mr. Case indicated that the applicant has concerns relative to liability in connection with plowing and maintenance of the proposed 12-foot gravel access. He commented that the gravel access would be a private road and the Town could not act as an insurer, thus causing liability issues for the owner, Avon Self Storage. He requested that
the Commission take into consideration the ongoing liability issues that the owner would realize if a gravel road were constructed and a gate installed.
David Whitney, PE, reviewed the site plan showing the proposed new building and the proposed new pavement area for RV storage (located on the south end of the site). He noted that there are 13 existing buildings on the site. He explained that the storm drainage is proposed to be relocated around the building. Parking for 5 vehicles is proposed for the gravel RV storage area, which would have room for approximately 10 RV’s. The RV storage area would be located about 20 feet below Arch Road; the embankment would provide a visual shield from the road. A fence exists around the entire self-storage complex; the fence would be extended around the southern end of the site. Mr. Whitney noted that the drawings have been revised to show the proposed emergency 12-foot gravel access. He
noted that the proposed gravel access is approximately 500 feet long with an additional 100-foot section that would reach the new proposed building.
Mr. Whitney addressed grading and noted that regrading below the 100-year flood line is proposed. He noted that the net cut would be approximately 3,600 cubic yards; 2,700 cubic yards would be placed in the area of the proposed new building to raise the land up to the 500-year flood elevation. He noted that the end result is a balanced site; no material would be taken away.
Mr. Whitney noted that a landscape plan, prepared by Rosemary Aldridge, was submitted with the original application. He noted that the landscape plan has not yet been revised to show the 12-foot gravel access; the same number of trees/shrubs are required but would be relocated around the access drive. He commented that there are existing mature trees in the shoulder area adjacent to Old Farms Road; he added that trees are proposed to be planted at the top of the slope on the other side of the existing driveway. A cross section showing Arch Road to the proposed new building was displayed. He noted that the proposed RV storage area would be tucked in between the building and a 20-foot embankment; this area would not be visible from the road.
Mr. Starr asked about gate locations. Mr. Case explained that the residents of Sconsett Point have requested that a gate be located in the area where the existing boulders are now located.
Mr. Case noted that if the Sconsett Point Association provides a letter noting this agreement, the applicant intends to locate a gate where these boulders are located.
Mr. Gackstatter asked whether locating a gate on Sconsett Point’s property would create maintenance issues for the road. Mr. Case explained that this scenario would leave Mr. Haines with the obligation of plowing that section of the road; he noted that the road is already paved and there should be no wear and tear but it would have to be plowed. He noted that Sconsett Point tries to keep people from using this area as a trash dump.
Mr. Whitney displayed the most current site plan and noted that two gates are proposed; one at each end of the proposed 12-foot gravel accessway. Mr. Case noted that the gates have been shown this way because the applicant does not have rights to locate something on someone else’s property. He added that if this gravel way is constructed, there would be ongoing liability for Avon Dreamer.
Robert Haines noted his concerns in the event a tree falls down and blocks the gravel access for some period of time. He asked what his liability would be in the event that there was a fire in Sconsett Point and the fire trucks couldn’t get through because the gravel access was blocked. He noted that he would have to pay for maintenance year and year without realizing any benefits. He commented that he is not saying that he wouldn’t build the road but noted his concerns with what the Commission is asking for. Mr. Case commented that he doesn’t know if there is an answer but confirmed that the owner would have liability, as it would be a private road that would have to be maintained.
In response to Mr. Haines questions, Mr. Kushner explained that the Town could not maintain the gravel access because it would not be a Town road, not built to public road standards. He noted that Sconsett Point is also a private road and added that at the time it was approved the Commission requested only a 40-foot right-of-way to ensure that it could never become a public road. He added that there is a note on the approved plan for Sconsett Point stating that the road is private and would not be accepted as a public road. Mr. Haines noted that the Sconsett Point Association pays to maintain their road; he noted that he would not ask Sconsett Point to pay him to maintain the proposed gravel access. Mr. Kushner commented that the cost to maintain the proposed gravel access maybe could be viewed as
a cost to do business; he added that the benefit received is an approval by the Town to construct an additional 20,000-square-foot building. He explained that the proposed gravel access has been shown all along, since the late 1980’s, as part of a master plan for this area. Mr. Haines concurred but added that the Town made it clear many years ago that construction of a gravel access did in no way guarantee any future approvals for development on the remaining 9 acres. He reiterated that he has no issue building the road but conveyed his concerns regarding liability and the unfairness imposed.
Mr. Gackstatter asked whether Mr. Haines would be protected under State law regarding open access for a public way if he opened this gravel road for public access. Mr. Kushner noted that he believes that that particular State Statute speaks to recreational access (i.e., hiking trails) and added that he doesn’t think it would apply in this case.
Mr. Starr explained that the gravel access would not be open to the public and would be used only for emergency situations.
Mr. Case commented that he doesn’t believe anyone, including Sconsett Point, would want this gravel way to be open to the public.
Mr. Starr noted his agreement with Mr. Kushner’s earlier comments that the gravel access is simply the cost of doing business. He commented that the Commission will only move forward with the proposed new building if they have assurances with regard to safety and the construction of the proposed emergency gravel access way.
Mrs. Griffin commented that the applicant is not obligated to plow the area for Sconsett Point; she added that Sconsett Point must maintain their portion. She suggested that if the applicant plowed the Sconsett Point piece that possibly Sconsett Point would offer reimbursement. She indicated that if this is not the case, the gate should be located on the boundary line as shown on the current plan.
Stanley Cohen, representing Sconsett Point homeowners, commented that the residents of Sconsett Point (14 homes) are really the endangered species that the Commission should be looking out for. He commented that the residents have no children and are paying taxes and getting no services whatsoever. He commented that there are 17 developments (i.e., Devonshire, Biltmore) off of West Avon Road that have only one exit; he added that 5 of these developments were built after Sconsett Point. He asked why the Town is suddenly concerned with safety at Sconsett Point. He further asked why the Town can’t let Mr. Haines construct a small exit on his own property. Mr. Cohen noted that there has been trouble in the past with kids having parties and parking their cars on the private road for Sconsett
Point. He indicated that once they brought the boulders in this problem went away. He noted that Sconsett Point wants Mr. Haines to have his additional building; they want to be good neighbors and noted that the liability issue could be solved by allowing Mr. Haines to construct an emergency access only on his own property.
Mr. Case commented that if Sconsett Point wants to keep their boulders, the applicant would place the gate at the property line. Mr. Starr explained that any approval, if granted, would only affect the subject property owner. Any agreement to move the gate would be a private agreement between Sconsett Point and the applicant.
Mrs. Griffin pointed out that if the gravel access is constructed, Sconsett Point would be obligated to keep their portion clear, maintained and plowed, and without boulders. Mr. Starr concurred. Mr. Case concurred and added that if the gravel access is constructed, the boulders would have to be removed and some type of chain installed across the access.
Dan Bales, 2 Sconsett Bluff, commented that Mr. Haines already has 2 entrances into his property. He noted that there are over 220 homes on two streets in Avon that have only a single entrance and exit. He asked why a special exception is needed in this situation.
Mr. Starr explained that many of the areas noted have only one entrance and exit because development hasn’t extended far enough to construct the secondary access.
Mr. Bale noted that many of the areas are on dead end roads with no opportunity for a second entrance/exit. He suggested that consideration be given to not constructing the section of the proposed gravel access that would be located on Sconsett Point’s property. He added that this scenario would make Sconsett Point residents happy and noted that they would be in the same compliance as all the houses on those other two roads in Town. He commented that there are wetlands adjacent to the proposed gravel access and added that if a chain were installed, vehicles could easily drive around it. He reiterated his suggestion that the proposed gravel access, if constructed, not be extended to Sconsett Point property.
Mr. Haines commented that he would put up signs and do everything he could to keep everyone off the property.
Mr. Kushner explained that the proposed gravel access is principally to provide some level of added protection to the Sconsett Point development; however, the people speaking tonight are not overly concerned about it. In addition, the Fire Marshal is pleased that this gravel connection could, in a rare situation, provide another opportunity to get fire apparatus to Mr. Haines’ storage facility. The storage units are packed tight and, in the event of a fire, could result in a significant burn. He commented that if, by chance, the only connection back to Old Farms Road is blocked, the proposed gravel connection could provide a means for emergency equipment access.
Mr. Starr clarified that the proposed gravel connector would provide access, via the Sconsett Point development, so fire equipment could reach Avon Self Storage. Mr. Kushner concurred.
Mrs. Griffin noted that the gravel access would also provide another way into Sconsett Point should the Old Farms Road access be blocked. She commented that there would be access for emergency vehicles to reach Sconsett Point, whether the residents want it or not. She pointed out that there is no way to access this site from the rear, as it backs up to the River. She explained that the Commission required the proposed gravel connector from the very beginning planning stages of the Sconsett Point development; she added that the Commission would not have approved the project without the connector access.
Mr. Kushner commented that it is unknown, at this point, what Mr. Haines plans for his remaining 9 acres of land and added that this fact is another reason why the master plan included the connector road. He noted that while these 9 acres have some constraints due to wetlands, there is some development potential. Mr. Kushner addressed liability and noted that if the Commission decided not to require the connector/access, he believes that the Town Attorney would ask the Town to obtain a letter from the Sconsett Point Homeowners Association and
Mr. Haines indicating their understanding that although the Commission had an interest in making a connection they (Sconsett Point and Mr. Haines) have no concerns in that regard and encourage the Commission not to require such a connection.
Mr. Cohen commented that the Sconsett Point residents do have concerns but added that they know that the Fire Department can park on Old Farms Road and access the fire hydrant that is 25 to 30 feet away; both properties could be taken care of.
Mr. Kushner explained that it is not only a matter of fire equipment; there must be access for emergency vehicles during a snow storm in the middle of the night. He commented that it is always good to have options.
There being no further input, the public hearing for Apps. #4535 and #4539 was closed.
App. #4554 William Deramo, owner/applicant, request for 2-lot Resubdivision, 2.69 acres, 359 West Avon Road, Parcel 4520359, in an R40 Zone.
App. #4555 William Deramo, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section IV.A.5.of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit waiver of density requirement, 359 West Avon Road, Parcel 4520359, in an R40 Zone.
Present were William Ferrigno, President of Sunlight Construction, on behalf of the owner, and William Deramo, owner.
Mr. Ferrigno explained that Mr. Deramo’s property backs up to West Hills Drive, a public road. He noted that the original proposal was to subdivide Mr. Deramo’s property to create another lot and build Mr. Deramo a new one-story house. Unfortunately, the new lot would not be flat enough to serve Mr. Deramo’s needs for a one-story home. Mr. Ferrigno explained that Mr. Deramo has decided that he would like to build a new house at the Knoll Lane Subdivision. The density calculation for the resubdivision application equals 1.94 and falls short of the requirement needed for 2 lots. The proposal is to add some land from an adjoining lot owned by Sunlight Construction. Mr. Ferrigno noted that a Special Exception application has been submitted to request a waiver of the
density requirement to permit 2 lots.
Mr. Ferrigno addressed Staff Comments from the Town Engineering Department, dated July 15, 2011. He pointed out that Mr. Deramo’s existing driveway originates from West Avon Road and is approximately 500 feet in length. He noted that the new proposed driveway is much steeper than the existing driveway. The existing driveway exits onto West Avon Road near the Avon Middle School, where traffic backs up at least 2 times per day. He commented that it seems better to consider having a driveway exit off of West Hills Drive. He explained that part of Mr. Deramo’s existing driveway is an easement over someone else’s property. He further explained that it has not yet been determined whether Mr. Deramo has the legal right to gain access for a second lot. He noted that the
proposed new driveway is at a 13.5% grade, which complies with the Town’s Regulations. He explained that the grading off the proposed driveway would be at a 2:1 slope instead of a 3:1 slope and is proposed this way to minimize impacts to the abutting lot. The Town Engineering Department recommends that a guide rail or some type of safety measure be installed in this area; Mr. Ferrigno noted that the applicant concurs. The property next door is owned by Sunlight Construction and some of the grading for the new lot would have to occur on that property. Mr. Ferrigno stated that he would grant an easement for grading purposes, if the subject applications get approved.
Mr. Starr noted his concerns with the steepness of the proposed driveway; he added that no flat spot is indicated and explained that he would like to see the engineering details before he makes a decision. He commented that he has not seen the density calculations. Mr. Ferrigno commented that the density calculations are on the plan. Mr. Starr explained that Staff Comments from the Engineering Department need to be resolved before the Commission can act. Mr. Ferrigno noted his understanding.
Mr. Ferrigno noted that the first 12 to 14 feet at the top of the proposed driveway is flat and there is also a flat pad at the bottom. He commented that he would never propose a 14% grade into someone’s garage; a 50 to 60-foot flat pad would exist right outside the house. Mr. Starr reiterated that he would need to receive a report from the Engineering Department. Mr. Ferrigno noted his understanding.
In response to Mr. Gackstatter’s questions, Mr. Ferrigno explained that Mr. Deramo’s existing house would remain. He further explained that the subject proposal is to create one additional lot for new house construction; he indicated that Mr. Deramo’s existing house may possibly get remodeled but reiterated that it would remain and not be demolished. He noted that some land area from an adjacent property (15 West Hills Drive owned by Sunlight Construction) is proposed to be added to the proposed new lot via a boundary line adjustment; the purpose/goal is to get the proposed lot closer to the required density. Mr. Ferrigno added that there is an existing house located at 15 West Hills Drive and the proposed boundary revision is shown on the resubdivision plan.
Mr. Ferrigno addressed the existing driveway and explained that in order to be able to use it, it would have to be widened. He explained that there is a wetlands crossing in the area and noted that that is another reason why using the existing driveway for a shared purpose was not considered.
In response to Mrs. Clark’s question, Mr. Ferrigno explained that the proposal is to install, along the first 50 to 60 feet of West Hills Drive, some type of aesthetically-pleasing, bollard-type guide rail off the side of the proposed driveway. He noted that the grade in this area is steeper than the Engineering Department would normally recommend.
In response to Mr. Gackstatter’s question, Mr. Ferrigno stated that the centerline of the road is at elevation 364.5 and the driveway area is at elevation 338; the area levels off at elevation 336. Mr. Ferrigno noted an elevation difference of approximately 24 feet.
Mrs. Griffin commented that if the existing driveway were used, there would be no need to construct the proposed curvy, steep driveway; she added that it may not be that much more costly to pursue the use of the existing driveway. Mr. Ferrigno acknowledged that there are some arguments in favor of using the existing driveway. Mrs. Griffin commented that the subject proposal seems to be squeezing very hard in an attempt to get one more lot with a very questionable driveway. She commented that she would like to see more effort with regard to gaining driveway access from West Avon Road, as that would make the proposal more palatable. Mr. Ferrigno noted that he would take the Commission’s comments/suggestions under advisement.
Mr. Starr noted his strong agreement with Mrs. Griffin’s comments.
Mr. Ferrigno stated that the site has been studied and evaluated from many perspectives. He added that while access from West Hills Drive can be defended, he noted his understanding of the Commission’s position. He asked what the Commission’s standing would be if it was discovered that Mr. Deramo does not possess the legal right to access from West Avon Road. Mrs. Griffin asked that the possibility of access from West Avon Road be explored first. Mr. Ferrigno stated that access from West Avon Road would be explored before the next meeting.
Mr. Starr noted that the public hearing will be continued to allow time for outstanding issues to be addressed.
Mrs. Clark motioned to continue the public hearing for Apps. #4554 and #4555 to the next meeting, scheduled for September. The motion, seconded by Mr. Thompson, received unanimous approval.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Mr. Gackstatter motioned to waive Administrative Procedure #6 and consider Apps. #4535, #4536, and #4539. Mr. Mahoney seconded the motion that received unanimous approval.
App. #4535 Avon Self Storage, LLC/Avon Dreamer, LLC, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VI.H.3.k. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit self storage facility, 190 and 230 Old Farms Road, Parcels 3360190 and 3360230, in I and R40 Zones (proposed zone change to I for Parcel 3360230)
App. #4536 Avon Self Storage, LLC/Avon Dreamer, LLC, owner/applicant, request for Site Plan Approval to permit self storage facility, 190 and 230 Old Farms Road, Parcels 3360190 and 3360230 in I and R40 Zones (proposed zone change to I for Parcel 3360230)
App. #4539 Avon Self Storage, LLC/Avon Dreamer, LLC, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section III.G.4.d.and f. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit filling and regrading in the floodplain, 190 and 230 Old Farms Road, Parcels 3360190 and 3360230, in I and R40 Zones. (proposed zone change to I for Parcel 3360230)
Mr. Starr commented that he feels the Commission must require the emergency gravel access; he added that the gates need to be located at the property line. If the applicant reaches some type of agreement with Sconsett Point, the gate locations could be adjusted.
Mrs. Griffin conveyed her strong feeling that the emergency access is necessary, whether the present owners of Sconsett Point agree or not.
Mr. Mahoney commented that he thought the Commission was going to entertain the idea of a letter from the Sconsett Point Homeowners Association stating that they didn’t want the emergency access.
Mrs. Griffin explained that she feels it is the Commission’s responsibility to provide for the health, welfare, and safety of the residents of Avon. The Commission must require the emergency connector, as the present owners of Sconsett Point will not be the homeowners of the future.
Mr. Starr commented that down the road there could be a new homeowner at Sconsett Point, one that doesn’t exist currently, that has an emergency situation and the Town could be liable if no emergency access existed.
Mr. Gackstatter pointed out an old saying that things are not a problem until they are. He addressed an earlier conversation where it was noted that there are other areas in Town with a similar scenario of only one way in and one way out. He noted his concern that identifying other bad examples/scenarios of conditions that should not exist in Town is not a good reason to add another location to those bad examples. He commented that he feels the Commission should enforce the Regulations, as they are in place to improve accessibility and general safety for everyone.
Mr. Starr noted that some of the areas in Town that have limited accessibility are temporary in nature and added that someday a thru connection would occur.
In response to Mr. Starr’s question, Mr. Kushner suggested that conditions for an approval be considered relative to the gate positions and final design, which should be at the discretion of the Fire Marshal.
Mrs. Griffin motioned to approve Apps. #4535, #4536, and #4539 subject to the following conditions:
1. Two “gates” shall be installed/positioned as represented on the drawing entitled, “Sketch of Emergency Access Connector Drive for Avon Self Storage Phase IV, 190 and 230 Old Farms Road, David F. Whitney Consulting Engineers, LLC, dated May 25, 2011, revised to June 14, 2011”.
2. The final design of the “gates” shall be submitted to the Town Fire Marshal for review and approval.
3. The 12-foot gravel access shall be plowed and maintained to be accessible year round.
The motion, seconded by Mrs. Clark, received unanimous approval.
OUTSTANDING APPLICATIONS
App. #4549 Robert Zappalorti, owner, Accubranch, LLC, applicant, request for Site Plan Approval for bank with drive thru and modifications to parking, dumpster, and landscaped areas, 232 West Main Street, Parcel 4540232, in a CR Zone.
Present was Robert M. Meyers, the Law Offices of Robert M. Meyers.
Mr. Starr reviewed 7 proposed conditions of approval for First Niagara Bank. These proposed conditions address a drive thru lane, a traffic control plan, a sidewalk, traffic circulation and signage, outdoor lighting, and a property maintenance schedule.
Attorney Meyers stated that the applicant would comply with all proposed conditions.
Mr. Kushner explained that the proposed conditions are drafted in a way that recognizes that the State has independent authority from this Commission. He noted that if the State requires some significant deviation from the approved plan, modifications would have to come back to the Commission for their review. He explained that it is likely that the plan that the Town Engineer and Chief of Police sign off on would be similar to the plan the State would approve with respect to traffic control signage. If a sign gets damaged, it would seem likely that the State would be happy to allow the bank to replace it.
Mrs. Clark motioned to approve App. #4549 subject to the following conditions:
1. The use of the proposed drive-thru lane shall be limited to the bank use only. Any proposed change to a restaurant shall require special exception approval by the Commission for both the restaurant and the drive-thru lane.
2. The approved site plan includes a specific traffic control plan with signage noting no left-hand turns are permitted at the proposed right in, right out only driveway leading to Route 44. The bank shall be responsible to monitor these signs such that if they are damaged or removed for any reason they shall be immediately replaced at the expense of the bank. To demonstrate the bank’s acknowledgement of this condition, prior to the issuance of a building permit an appropriate official of First Niagara Bank shall prepare a letter to the Town indicating their understanding related to this responsibility.
3. The bank shall construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk running along the entire frontage of this parcel along Route 44. This shall be installed within the State Right-of-Way if permitted by the State Department of Transportation; otherwise, it shall be installed on private property in a location to be approved by Town Staff.
4. An overall traffic circulation and signage plan shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Town Engineer and Chief of Police prior to the issuance of a building permit.
5. All outdoor lighting shall be turned off within 1 hour of closing time except for security lights, which are necessary for the ATM, for the night depository, and for safe travel to and from those locations.
6. Applicant shall prepare a maintenance schedule relating to parking lot sweeping, litter control, and catch basin maintenance. A copy of this maintenance schedule shall be submitted to the Town Planning Department.
7. Any decision resulting in a change to the proposed site improvement plan, traffic circulation plan, or signage plan as a result of review and permitting by the State DOT shall also require approval from the Town. Minor changes, as determined by Town Staff, may be approved by Town Staff. More substantial changes shall be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission with an application for Site Plan Modification.
The motion, seconded by Mr. Mahoney, received unanimous approval.
OTHER BUSINESS
Weatherstone Subdivision (PZC App. #4304 - conditional approval) request to revise phasing plan for Phase III to create sub phases - Tom Francoline and Jeff Sard
Mr. Kushner reported that he has met with Tom Francoline and Jeff Sard who are interested in revising the construction sequencing associated with Phase III of the Weatherstone Subdivision. Phase III has 28 lots, Phase II has 30 lots, and Phase I has 2 lots. He explained that both Phase I and II have received final approval form the Commission but Phase III has only received conditional approval, to date. The land that comprises Phase III is still owned by Donald Jakubiak. Tom Francoline and Jeff Sard would like to move forward and exercise their option to purchase this land and convert their conditional approval to final approval. Mr. Kushner explained that due to the current economic climate, Messrs. Francoline and Sard are looking to move at a slower pace with Phase III and break it up into
smaller sub phases. He suggested that he has recommended to Messrs. Francoline and Sard that they return to the Commission to request a modification to the approval conditions for App. #4304, dated July 24, 2007. He commented that these conditions required a road connection to the Kingswood Subdivision, as soon as possible, as well as the dedication of 20 acres of open space and the installation of a sewer line. He added that much of the open space is actually a requirement of the earlier phases of Weatherstone, and needs to be taken care of right away.
Mr. Kushner addressed an alternative scenario suggested by Messrs. Francoline and Sard. He noted that while he doesn’t feel this scenario is as desirable, the applicants would return to the Commission at their September meeting with applications for 5 individual subdivisions in lieu of asking for a modification to one phase (i.e., break up the existing Phase III into 5 separate sub phases). He noted that this scenario would allow the applicants to file 5 individual, smaller bonds.
Mr. Starr commented that 5 applications for resubdivision would require additional open space. Mr. Kushner noted that he couldn’t speak for the applicants with regard to additional open space but clarified that, under any scenario, the number of lots would remain the same at 28; the lot boundaries would remain unchanged; and the street layout would remain unchanged.
Mr. Starr noted that he would like to see the connection to Lofgren Road completed earlier rather than later. Mr. Kushner concurred and added that should a modification be granted he believes that the applicants would commit to building a gravel roadway for emergency vehicles and then paving it at a later date. He explained that while the applicants realize the importance of this road connection they would like to be relieved of the requirement to accomplish it in connection with the first 3 lots in Phase III.
Mr. Starr asked Mr. Kushner to convey to Messrs. Francoline and Sard that the Commission is anxious for this road connection. Mr. Kushner concurred and asked if the Commission prefers the first scenario as opposed to the second, that being the submittal of 5 individual subdivision applications. Mr. Starr agreed that the first scenario, to break up Phase III into smaller sub phases, appears preferable. He noted that he believes that if resubdivision applications are submitted, the Commission is entitled, under the Regulations, to more open space or a fee in lieu.
Mr. Kushner noted that the applicants are also concerned that if they submit 5 new subdivision applications they may have to reapply to wetlands.
INFORMAL COMMISSION DISCUSSION - SCONSETT POINT
Mrs. Griffin noted her concerns that the road to Sconsett Point is presently blocked by boulders as well as the residents’ reluctance to having a thru road. She noted that the Town must ensure that the boulders are removed. She commented that she doesn’t believe that the road to Sconsett Point is currently being plowed. She noted that, up to this point, the road was not connected to anything so there wasn’t much point but added that once a connection is made it must be plowed.
Mr. Starr concurred and noted that some agreement would have to be made with regard to the gates and the boulders; either the gate replaces the boulders at their current location or the boulders go away if the gate is installed at the property line. Mr. Kushner noted that he would discuss this with the President of the Sconsett Point Association. Mr. Starr commented that he doesn’t feel the Association would object to removing the boulders, as the gate would serve the same purpose, which is to keep out recreational parking.
Mr. Gackstatter noted that it is his understanding that the concern of Sconsett Point residents is that vehicles continue on, past the boulders, to party and dump things and that is why the boulders are located further up the road as opposed to at the end of the road.
Mr. Starr explained that the Commission can only require a gate to be located at the property line but noted that the applicant and Sconsett Point could work something out on their own.
Mr. Kushner commented that if the Sconsett Point Association does not grant permission to have the gate located on their property and it has to be located at the property line and if the Association does not want to remove the boulders, the Town could write a letter to the Association, on the Commission’s behalf. He explained that the boulders are not shown on the approved plan for Sconsett Point; the road was approved as a through road. Mr. Starr concurred.
Mr. Gackstatter commented that the boulders are a liability issue and asked what a homeowners’ responsibilities are in connection with clearing private roads to enable access to another property.
Mr. Kushner acknowledged that he doesn’t know but noted that he could ask the Town Attorney. He added that there are many private commercial retail projects in Town that connect with other private commercial projects. In most cases, there are formal easements in place for these connections. He commented that although it has not been an issue to date, theoretically, a situation could occur such that a driveway to Route 44 is blocked and the next door neighbor hasn’t yet plowed his driveway.
Mr. Gackstatter commented that if Sconsett Point doesn’t grant Avon Self Storage an easement, Avon Self Storage could not maintain the portion of the gravel access located on Sconsett Point’s property; he questioned whether a safe route is really being provided if maintenance cannot be assured.
Mr. Starr commented that Sconsett Point would be obligated to maintain the access on their property, up to their property line.
Mrs. Griffin commented that the proposed gravel access is shown on the approved plan for Sconsett Point. She added that the Sconsett Point residents have known all along that the road was always supposed to be a thru road and a way to get out of the property.
Mr. Starr explained that he believes that the approved drawings/maps for Sconsett Point show a road stub at the property line noting that it is to eventually become a connecting road and that Sconsett Point residents are required to maintain it.
Mrs. Griffin commented that she finds it baffling that a group of people who have acknowledged that they don’t have any children and are in an older age group don’t recognize the dangers.
Mr. Gackstatter and Mrs. Clark agreed.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:40 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Sadlon, Clerk
LEGAL NOTICE
TOWN OF AVON
At a meeting held on July 19, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon voted as follows:
App. #4535 Avon Self Storage, LLC/Avon Dreamer, LLC, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VI.H.3.k. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit self storage facility, 190 and 230 Old Farms Road, Parcels 3360190 and 3360230, in I and R40 Zones (proposed zone change to I for Parcel 3360230) APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.
App. #4536 Avon Self Storage, LLC/Avon Dreamer, LLC, owner/applicant, request for Site Plan Approval to permit self storage facility, 190 and 230 Old Farms Road, Parcels 3360190 and 3360230 in I and R40 Zones (proposed zone change to I for Parcel 3360230) APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.
App. #4539 Avon Self Storage, LLC/Avon Dreamer, LLC, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section III.G.4.d.and f. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit filling and regrading in the floodplain, 190 and 230 Old Farms Road, Parcels 3360190 and 3360230, in I and R40 Zones. (proposed zone change to I for Parcel 3360230) APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.
App. #4549 Robert Zappalorti, owner, Accubranch, LLC, applicant, request for Site Plan Approval for bank with drive thru and modifications to parking, dumpster, and landscaped areas, 232 West Main Street, Parcel 4540232, in a CR Zone. APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.
Dated at Avon this 20th day of July, 2011. Copy of this notice is on file in the Office of the Town Clerk, Avon Town Hall.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Duane Starr, Chairman
Douglas Thompson, Vice-Chairman/Secretary
LEGAL NOTICE
TOWN OF AVON
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday, September 13, 2011, at 7:30 P. M. at the Avon Senior Center on the following:
App. #4558 - Riverdale Farms LLC, owner, Marc Rietze, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VI.F.3.c. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit Class III restaurant, 124 Simsbury Road, Parcel 3970124, in a CP-B Zone.
App. #4560 - Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception Approval under Section III.G.4.a of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit filling and regrading in the floodplain/floodway for expansion to Fisher Meadows Park, 800 Old Farms Road, Parcel 3360800, in an ROS Zone.
App. #4562 Proposed Amendment to Avon Subdivision Regulations pertaining to Low Impact Development (LID); Town of Avon, applicant.
App. #4563 Proposed Amendment to Avon Zoning Regulations pertaining to Low Impact Development (LID); Town of Avon, applicant.
App. #4564 - Old Avon Realty, LLC owner, Capitol Region Education Council, applicant, request for Zone Change from NB to RU2A, 1.42 acres 59 Waterville Road, Parcel 4500059.
All interested persons may appear and be heard and written communications will be received. Applications are available for inspection in Planning and Community Development at the Avon Town Hall. Dated at Avon this 30th day of August, 2011.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Duane Starr, Chairman
Douglas Thompson, Vice-Chairman/Secretary
| 
