TOWN OF EAST WINDSOR
Planning and Zoning Commission
Public Hearing #1486
June 27, 2006
***** Draft Document - Subject to Commission Approval *****
The meeting was called to order at 7:01 P. M. by Chairman Guiliano in the Meeting Room of the Town Hall, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, CT.
ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM:
A quorum was established as three Regular Members (Guiliano, Ouellette and Saunders) and three Alternate Members (Kehoe, Matthews, and Tyler) were present. Regular Members Gowdy and Rodrigue ere absent. Chairman Guiliano noted Alternate Commissioners Kehoe and Matthews will sit in on any items of business this evening. Also present was Town Planner Whitten, and Ex-Officio Member Selectman Filipone.
ADDED AGENDA ITEMS: None.
RECEIPT OF APPLICATIONS:
Chairman Guiliano acknowledged receipt of the following Applications:
1) Application of Chris Skabardonis for Administrative Site Plan approval for 10’ x 20’ office addition at Nutmeg Restart, 297 South Main Street. B-2 Zone; Map 39, Block 23, Lot 49
2) Application of Hope Petersen for a special Use Permit to allow an accessory apartment at 56 Kreyssig Road. [A-1 Zone; Map 10, Block 76, Lot 4-6].
3) Application of the Town of East Windsor for Site Plan Approval for 550 linear foot road to be paved at the Veteran’s Cemetery (Windsorville Cemetery). [R-3 Zone; map 36, Block 60, Lot 26].
4) Application of KFC US Properties, Inc., c/o Jim Santos for Site Plan Approval for a 3,200 sq. ft. Taco Bell/KFC Restaurant, with drive-thru- window, at 43 Prospect Hill Road, owned by South Prospect Hill Road, LLC. [HIFZ Zone; Map 11, Block 14, Lot 14].
TABLED HEARING: Thomas K. Daniels – 2-lot resubdivision for property located at 11 and 19 Rolocut Road, owned by Marjorie Taylor and Anne Daniels. [A-1 Zone; Map 8, Block 27, Lots S4, S5, and S6]. (Deadline to close hearing 8/1/06):
Chairman Guiliano read the Hearing description. Appearing to discuss this Application was Attorney Thomas Fahey, and Marek (Mark) Kement.
Mr. Kement described the parcel as containing 5.32 acres; 1.7 acres of that area is wetlands. They have received Inland/Wetlands approval for regulated activity and are proposing a Conservation Easement of 2 1/2 acres or 48.7% of the parcel. Attorney Fahey did note that Conservation Easement is really not land the Town would benefit from but there is the benefit of no construction. Mr. Kement noted the entire parcel is wooded. In the 1960s the property was subdivided into parcels but there was no legal subdivision of the lots. In the 1980s parcels 1 and 2 were cut out; parcel become the Jehovah’s Witness Kingdom Hall on North Road. Attorney Fahey noted Mr. Kement’s letter of 6/8/2006 indicating 3 additional items - sheet 2 of 3 now shows cross-section B-B running through the
proposed culvert on lot S4, Conservation Easement lines have been labeled with metes and bounds on the individual site plans, and sight distances have been shown for both proposed driveways on Rolocut Road. - have been addressed as a response to Town Engineer Norton’s comments. He also noted they have received approval from the North Central Health Department, who feels they have complied with all regulations and that they are requesting reasonable waivers.
Commissioner Saunders requested clarification of the situation with Lorraine Lafferty. Attorney Fahey suggested Ms. Lafferty understood she was to receive more lots in addition to the one lot she was given but a Title Search has been done and the Daniels family owns these parcels free and clear. That issue is not within this Commission’s jurisdiction. Town Planner Whitten noted Ms. Lafferty visited her office today to make copies of the file documentation; she understood Ms. Lafferty was to appear this evening but she is not in the audience. Commissioner Saunders asked if the question was the original “subdivision”? Attorney Fahey suggested the lots were originally deeded out to 6 different entities but they were not legal building lots. When the
Application came through for the Jehovah Witness Kingdom Hall those lots were being shown on the plans as not building lots. Mr. Kement suggested it was being shown on the plan as part of the remaining land but not for this Application.
Attorney Fahey submitted FOR THE RECORD a copy of the plans approved for the on-site septic systems.
Town Planner Whitten noted Town Engineer Norton had no issues with this proposal; he will prepare a memo for the file as nothing was submitted this evening. Attorney Fahey queried if the file contained a copy of the Inland/Wetlands approval; Town Planner Whitten noted that it did. She requested a copy of the official Title Search prepared; Attorney Fahey and Mr. Kement both submitted copies.
Chairman Guiliano questioned that the wetlands lie within the Conservation Easement? Mr. Kement concurred that they did. Chairman Guiliano questioned why this Commission would accept the Conservation Easement instead of a Fee-In-Lieu of Open Space for land that nothing can be done with? Attorney Fahey indicated the Conservation Easement is being offered as an alternative to Open Space; it’s often beneficial to leave land open with it being built on. The area of the Conservation Easement is equal to 48% of the parcel; it would stay as it is now, without intrusion. Attorney Fahey noted he realizes the Commission could request a Fee-In-Lieu of Open Space instead. Chairman Guiliano suggested since the area is wetlands and can’t be built on he is not in favor of
taking the Conservation Easement in place of a Fee-In-Lieu of Open Space; Commissioners Kehoe and Matthews agreed with Chairman Guiliano; Commission Ouellette would be agreeable to either option.
With regard to the trees, Chairman Guiliano requested the addition of a note on the plans that “no clear cutting be allowed in the remaining area between the street - the frontage”; the parcels should have a streetscape. He noted the Commission has imposed that condition in the past; Mr. Kement had no problem with the request.
Chairman Guiliano opened discussion to the audience:
Lorraine Lafferty, Broad Brook: Ms. Lafferty submitted a packet of material to Chairman Guiliano and Town Planner Whitten which are issues of concern to her. Chairman Guiliano noted the Commission and the Applicant did touch on these issues earlier in the presentation; this Commission doesn’t deal with someone saying they are given you land; it’s a legal issue. Ms. Lafferty questioned if they did the Title Search which was requested by the Wetlands Commission? Town Planner Whitten indicated they do try to verify that the applicant is the true owner, and they have done that. Ms. Lafferty commented about her involvement as Executor of her father’s Estate, and Mr. Daniels position as an outsider. Attorney Fahey noted the did do a Title
Search which shows the Applicant does owner the property; the Title is insurable. He suggested that covers the items under discussion. Ms. Lafferty questioned the status of the approval; Town Planner Whitten noted it was still under discussion.
MOTION: To CLOSE the Public Hearing on the Application of Thomas K. Daniels for a 2-lot resubdivision for property located at 11 and 19 Rolocut Road, owned by Marjorie Taylor and Anne Daniels. [A-1 Zone; Map 8, Block 27, Lots S4, S5, and S6].
Saunders moved/Ouellette seconded/VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous
Chairman Guiliano requested the addition of an additional condition - Condition 25 regarding no clear cutting back from the frontage - when the Commission considers
MOTION TO APPROVE the following waivers:
Section 6.3 (sidewalks) No sidewalks to be provided, as none exist in proximity of the subject parcel.
Saunders moved/Ouellette seconded/VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous
MOTION TO APPROVE the following waivers:
Section 6.5 (street lights) Street lights already exist.
Saunders moved/Ouellette seconded/VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous
MOTION TO APPROVE the following waivers:
Section 7.1 (Open Space)…propose to use conservation easements in lieu of open space
Saunders moved/Ouellette seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: No one
Opposed: Unanimous
Abstained: No one
MOTION TO APPROVE the Application of owners Marjorie Taylor & Anne Daniels, requesting a 2 lot re-subdivision (2 lots total) at property located at on the north side of Rolocut Road, to be known as 11 and 19 Rolocut Road, Assessors Map 8, Blk. 27. Lots S4, S5, and S6 in the A-1 Zone. This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans (as may be modified by the Commission) and the following conditions:
Referenced Plans:
Sheet 1 of 3 Resubdivision Plan for Marjorie Taylor & Anne Daniels, Map 8, Block 27, Lots S4, S5, S6, Rolocut Road, East Windsor, Connecticut, dated March 15, 2006, Scale 1” = 40”, A-1 Zone, prepared by Sanderson and Washburn, P.O. Box 55, 15 Main Street, Tariffville, CT 06081, 860/658-2307, 860 651-7157 faxcale 1” = 40’, dated 12/01/04 prepared by Gary B. LeClair, LLC, licensed land surveyor, 36 Suffield St., Ste 2, Windsor Locks, CT 06096, 860/627-8200
Sheet 2 of 3 Site Development Plan for Lot S4
Sheet 3 of 3 Site Development Plan for Lot S6
Conditions that must be met prior to signing of mylars:
1. The applicant shall submit a paper copy of the final approved plans to the Town Planner for review and comment prior to the submission of the final mylars.
2. All mylars submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for preparation of the plans.
3. The final mylars shall contain the street numbers assigned by the East Windsor Assessor’s Departments and the Map, Block and Lot numbers assigned by the Assessor's Office.
4. If the $2,000 fee per lot, payable to the Town Treasurer, is not paid prior to the filing of the final mylars, the mylars shall contain a clearly visible notation for each
applicable lot stating, “Any sale or transfer of this property within five (5) years of the original (re)subdivision approval to a person not exempt under section 7.10 of East Windsor’s Subdivision Regulations shall result in the liability of payment ($2000) to the Town of Eat Windsor for the total fee as defined in Section 7.6 of East Windsor’s Subdivision Regulations”.
5. The applicant shall provide two street trees on each lot and have them shown on the final plan.
6. The conditions of this approval shall be binding upon the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns. A copy of this approval motion shall be filed in the land records prior to the signing of the final mylars.
Conditions which must be met prior to the issuance of any permits:
7. The lots shall comply with the requirements of the North Central District Health Department requirements for on-site septic systems and wells.
8. Two sets of final mylars, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets shall be submitted for signature of the Commission. One set of signed mylars, Sheets 1 of 3 shall be filed with the town clerk by the applicant, no later than 90 days after the 15-day appeal period from publication of decision has elapsed or this approval shall be considered null and void unless an extension is granted by the Commission. One set, sheets1-3 of 3 shall be filed in the Planning and Zoning Department.
9. A detailed sediment and erosion control plan shall be submitted for each lot at the time of application for Zoning Permits.
10. A cash (escrow) or passbook bond shall be submitted for sedimentation and erosion control maintenance and site restoration during the construction of the project. Any funds that may be withdrawn by the Town for such maintenance or restoration shall be replaced within five (5) days or this permit shall be rendered null and void. The applicant's engineer shall submit an estimated cost of the E & S controls to the Town Engineer and the final amount of said bond shall be determined by the Town Engineer. (This bond covers public improvements, not individual lots.)
Conditions which must be met prior to certificates of compliance:
11. Iron pins must be in place at all lot corners and angle points.
12. Final Health District approval of the drinking water supply and the installation of the septic system must be demonstrated.
13. The driveway must have a 15' paved apron or a bond for such submitted.
14. Final grading and seeding shall be in place or a bond for the unfinished work submitted.
15. Final as-built survey showing all structures, pins, driveways and final floor elevations as well as spot grades and required landscaping shall be submitted.
16. All required landscaping shall be in place, or if weather does not permit, a bond for the required plantings shall be submitted
17. All public health and safety components of the project must be satisfactorily completed prior to occupancy. In cases where all public health and safety components have been completed, the Zoning Officer may issue a Certificate of Zoning Compliance provided a suitable bond is retained for any remaining site work.
General Conditions:
18. This subdivision approval shall expire five years from date of approval. Failure to complete all required improvements within that time shall invalidate the subdivision. The developer may request an extension of time to complete the subdivision improvements from the Commission. Such extension shall not exceed the time limits as provided for in the Connecticut General Statutes, Section 8-26c, as amended. The Commission shall require proper bonding be in place prior to the approval of any such extension.
19. A Zoning Permit shall be obtained prior to the commencement of any site work.
20. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans that result in lesser impacts may be allowed subject to staff review and approval.
21. Any modifications to the proposed drainage or grading for the resubdivision is subject to the approval of the town engineer.
22. Additional erosion control measures are to be installed as directed by town staff if field conditions necessitate.
23. By acceptance of this approval and conditions, the applicant, owner and/or their successors and assigns acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.
24. Should the property transfer ownership before all work is completed, or before a certificate of completeness is issued, the new owner must place new bonds in their name, at which time the original bond(s) may be released.
(Additional Condition):
25. No clear cutting back from frontage.
Saunders moved/Ouellette seconded/VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous
It was noted the Condition regarding the Fee-In-Lieu of Open Space is part of this approval motion already.
NEW BUSINESS: Chris Skabardonis – Administrative Site Plan approval for 10‘ x 20’ office addition at Nutmeg Restaurant, 297 South Main Street. [B-2 Zone; Map 39, Block 23, Lot 49] (Deadline for decision 8/31/06):
Chairman Guiliano read the description of this Item of Business. Appearing to discuss the Application was Chris Skabardonis, 297 South Main Street, East Windsor.
Town Planner Whitten noted this is actually an Administrative Site Plan Review; there is an existing office which was already built before Mr. Skabardonis took over the business. Commissioner Ouellette questioned if this affected the amount of impervious coverage? Town Planner Whitten noted everything was fine in that area. Chairman Guiliano noted Mr. Skabardonis is just stepping in as the new owner; he’s just trying to make the use/site plan correct.
MOTION TO APPROVE the application of owner Chris Skabardonis for Modification of Site Plan Approval for a 10’ x 20’ office addition at 297 South Main Street (aka Nutmeg Restaurant), presently zoned B-2 as shown on Assessors’ Map 39, Block 23, Lot 49. This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans (as may be modified by the Conditions) and the following conditions:
Referenced Plans:
- Sheet A1: Nutmeg Restaurant, Office Building and Fire Code Modifications, 297 South Main Street, East Windsor, CT prepared by Lasse Aspelin & Assoc., 44 East Main St, Stafford Springs, CT 06076 dated 12/6/05, scale as shown.
-Conditions which must be met prior to signing of mylars:
1. All final plans submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for preparation of the plans.
2. The conditions of this approval shall be binding upon the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns. A copy of this approval motion shall be filed in the land records prior to the signing of the final plans.
Conditions which must be met prior to the issuance of any permits:
3. One set of final plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets shall be submitted for signature of the Commission. Both sets shall be filed in the Planning and Zoning Department.
4. A cash (escrow) or passbook bond shall be submitted for sedimentation and erosion control maintenance and site restoration during the construction of the project. Any funds that may be withdrawn by the Town for such maintenance or restoration shall be replaced within five (5) days or this permit shall be rendered null and void. The applicant's engineer shall submit an estimated cost of the E & S controls to the Town Engineer. The amount of said bond shall be determined by the Town Engineer.
Conditions which must be met prior to certificates of compliance:
5. Final grading and seeding shall be in place or a bond for the unfinished work submitted.
6. Final as-built survey showing all structures, pins, driveways and final floor elevations as well as spot grades shall be submitted.
7 All public health and safety components of the project must be satisfactorily completed prior to occupancy. In cases where all public health and safety components have been completed, the Zoning Officer may issue a Certificate of Zoning Compliance provided a suitable bond is retained for any remaining site work.
General Conditions:
8 In accordance with Section 13.5.4 of the Zoning Regulations, any approval of a site plan application shall commence the construction of buildings within one year from the date of approval and complete all improvements within five years of the date of approval, otherwise the approval shall become null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission.
9 A Zoning Permit shall be obtained prior to the commencement of any site work.
10 This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the filed plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans that result in lesser impacts may be allowed subject to staff review and approval.
11 Any modifications to the proposed drainage or grading for the site plan is subject to the approval of the town engineer.
12 Additional erosion control measures are to be installed as directed by town staff if field conditions necessitate.
13 By acceptance of this approval and conditions, the applicant, owner and/or their successors and assigns acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval
14 All required landscaping shall be adequately maintained.
Saunders moved/Ouellette seconded/VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous
OTHER BUSINESS: 8-24 Referral/Site Plan Approval – Town of East Windsor – for improvements to the Windsorville Cemetery (Veterans portion):
Selectman Crouch noted that 60 years ago this cemetery was developed for the veterans; money has been generated from the annual Veteran’s Road Race to be able to put in a driveway to the Veteran’s section, and associated parking. Commissioner Tyler questioned if they would need to add fill, or use the existing ground? Selectman Crouch indicated they would be putting in about 300 cubic yards of top soil; the natural material is gravel so they will go down about 9”, then put in about 3” of topsoil. The area slopes downhill; they will follow the contours. Commissioner Tyler suggested the temporary stockpiling of materials, silt fence, etc. have not been shown on the plans; Selectman Crouch will have them added. Commissioner Saunders questioned if the Town crew will
be doing any of the work, or if it will be contracted out? Selectman Crouch replied affirmatively, noting some of the work will be contracted out.
Chairman Guiliano queried if Commissioner Tyler would be agreed to showing the additional information on the plan and having Town Planner Whitten review the Application administratively? Selectman Crouch suggested conditions be added to the approval motion reflecting the changes the Commission prefers.
Commissioner Matthews questioned if the run off will be accelerated to the adjacent property? Selectman Crouch indicated it will run down onto existing Town property. Commissioner Matthews questioned if it will flood it? Selectman Crouch felt the run off should be picked up in the drainage. Commissioner Matthews questioned that there was no low spot to collect the run off on the ballfield? Selectman Crouch suggested he doesn’t see a lot of run off, the top will run to the center and be picked up and the rest will run onto the ballfield into a swale which keeps the ballfield from running onto other people’s property. Commissioners Tyler and Matthews would like Town Engineer Norton to look at the plan with regard to drainage run off.
Commissioner Kehoe questioned if the pavers will be sold? Selectman Crouch replied affirmatively; they have already sold some. Commissioner Matthews questioned the donation? Selectman Crouch indicated $35; it will be like a heros walk; it’s the next phase.
Commissioner Tyler questioned if there were graves in this section now? Selectman Crouch replied affirmatively. He noted the Town owns about 8 acres on top of this property so they could expand.
The Commission requested the following conditions be added to the approval motion: 1) Show area of stockpiled soil with property erosion and sedimentation controls; 2) place erosion and sedimentation controls downslope of all construction activity, and 3) town engineer should review any potential drainage issues prior to construction.
MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL to the East Windsor Board of Selectmen for the municipal improvement of the Veteran’s cemetery in the form of paving a road to be located at the Veteran’s Cemetery off Windsorville Road.
Saunders moved/Ouellette seconded/VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous
MOTION TO APPROVE the application of Town of East Windsor for Site Plan Approval for a 550 linear foot road to be paved at the Veteran’s Cemetery, zoned R-3, as shown on Assessor’s Map 36, Block 60, Lot 26. This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans (as may be modified by the Conditions)
Referenced Plans:
Sheet 1 of 1– Cover Sheet - “Windsorville Cemetery – Veteran’s Monument Improvements prepared for East Windsor Veteran’s Committee, Windsorville Road, East Windsor, CT, by J.R. Russo and Assoc, 1 Shoham Rd, East Windsor, CT 06088, 860/623-0569, 1”=10’ dated 11/2/05
(Additional Conditions):
1. Show area of stockpiled soil with proper Erosion and Sedimentation controls
2. Place Erosion and Sedimentation downslope of all construction activity.
3. Town Engineer should review any potential drainage issues prior to construction.
Saunders moved/Ouellette seconded/VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous
BUSINESS MEETING/(1) Informal Discussion of Manchester Methane:
Chairman Guiliano read the description of this Item of Business. Appearing to present the discussion was Scott Atkin of Anchor Engineering. Also present in the audience was Attorney Andy Glassman representing the Boticellos.
Mr. Atkin reported they were before the Commission in February representing Manchester Methane with a plan to construct a gas-to-energy facility composed of two engines. The plan called for the facility to be placed within the landfill adjacent to the existing gas flare system to the north of the closed landfill. After receiving a “blessing” from the Connecticut Siting Council they got the equipment and received a draft DEP permit. They are now requesting to make changes to the building size from 40’ x 80’ to 50’ x 100’ to facilitate maintenance for larger equipment. Also NU is thinking about having them move the building to the front of the property to reduce of running lines to the back.
Commissioner Tyler questioned how much methane is being produced? Mr. Atkin reported 700 cubic feet/minute currently. Commissioner Tyler questioned how long that could continue? Mr. Atkin noted it dropes off each year. Commissioner Tyler questioned that this would produce cleaner air and also electricity? Mr. Atkin replied affirmatively.
Mr. Atkin suggested the only change is really moving the building from the back to the front of the property. Commissioner Tyler questioned if it would produce a noise issue? Mr. Atkin reported the levels will still be below the State regulations, and less than a dump truck passing by down the road. Chairman Guiliano noted it would be a constant noise; he recalled that one of the main reasons the Commission agreed to this proposal was because of the placement of the building at the back of the property. Mr. Atkin suggested they considered putting the building in the back as the flare system would be the back up; now they are looking at new blowers. Chairman Guiliano that for people living across the street or a few houses down and having to listen to something 12 of hte level of a dump
truck going by daily; he questioned if Mr. Atkin would like it by his house? Mr. Atkin didn’t think he would mind. He suggested the building would be 400’ from Wapping Road, the houses are 600’; he noted the noise level was taken at the property line.
Commissioner Tyler questioned if the engines will be inside the building? Mr. Atkin replied affirmatively, noting the silencers are on the back of the building. He felt there is also a good sized buffer along Wapping Road; they thought about putting pines in but with the thickness of the current vegetation they thought it unnecessary.
Commissioner Ouellette questioned what other options might be; are there other issues for moving the facility back? Mr. Atkin suggested the accessibility of the facility for the maintenance people, and after speaking with the people at NU and determining the cost associated with running the lines to the back makes the facility marginal. Commissioner Ouellette queried that it’s really a business decision. Mr. Atkin suggested the cost of running the poles to the back is significant.
Commissioner Matthews questioned how long the facility would generate gas? Mr. Atkin suggested the landfill will generate gas for the next 75 years - 10 to 15 years to run the facility. Commissioner Matthews questioned if there were any similar facilities currently operating? Mr. Atkin suggested there is something like this one running at the south end of the landfill in Hartford but it doesn’t really clean up the air; what they are proposing here is state-of-the-art. There is also one in Albany.
Chairman Guiliano noted this is rural country; if the generator is working at 12 o’clock at night people will hear it for a long way. Mr. Atkin suggeted the general background level, with no trucks, is 48 to 52 decibles, with a truck at rest it’s 50 - 58 decibels, and with a truck driving by the houses it’s 60 to 76 decibels. Commissioner Tyler questioned at what time of the day were the decibels measured? Mr. Atkin suggested they were measured during the day. Commissioner Tyler reiterated the concern is at 11 o’clock at night, there will be no other noise; he suggested the Applicant should get the noise level at that time and then try to get the noise level without other noise. Mr. Atkin suggested the allowable noise level between an industrial zone and a
residential zone is 51 decibels. Commissioner Tyler suggested out in the country were the residents will have to listen to it (the allowable) noise level is zero, or at least it can be.
Chairman Guiliano felt the reason the commission agreed to the proposal was because the facility was being tucked away and the noise level at Wapping Road would be minimal, and because it’s costing you more money why should the taxpayers of East Windsor suffer? What about their lives? What about the people living across the street? What if they want to develop houses across the street? Mr. Atkin suggested he felt the facility, as proposed, will meet requireents, but he understood what Commissioner Tyler is saying.
Speaking from the audience Attorney Glassmann, who is counsel to the client, advised the Commission the Siting Council is hearing this Application; they (the applicant) is here to advise you about it. The siting council is the one to make the decision. There is nothing they are violating; there are noise standards they are complying with. Attorney Glassman felt the approval was based on analysis of the location of the facility and the decibel level; he is suggesting they are still not exceeding that decibel level; they are still complying.
Commissioner Tyler questioned Attorney Glassmann that he was saying that by moving the building in closer to the homes their life won’t be impacted? The Commission is only asking that the impact to the residents living on the road not be impacted. Commissioner Tyler suggested the Commission recommend that the criteria for not changing the approved location be that the noise level doesn’t change. Commissioner Tyler suggested it is making it noiser to those citizens, and it is doing it at night. Attorney Glassmann questioned what about the air quality? Commissioner Tyler indicated that’s a consideration but the Commission still doesn’t want it noiser at night than the location that was proposed originally. Commissioner Matthews questioned if the
facility must run 24 hours a day? Mr. Atkins replied affirmatively. Commissioner Tyler suggested there is a huge difference of the noise generated at noon, and at midnight. Commissioner Saunders questioned what the level of sound was compared to a lawn mower? Mr. Atkins felt it was 45 decibels when the cooler was running; the Connecticut standard is 51 decibels for an industrial zone next to a residential zone. A lawn mower is over 85 decibels. Commissioner Saunders suggested the countryside can be pretty quiet; the grogs and the crickets can irritate you. Attorney Glassmann felt more than this facility. Commissioner Tyler noted that constant noise can cause all kinds of health problems; lets try to avoid that.
Commissioner Ouellette questioned what type of approval the Applicant needs from this Commission? Town Planner Whitten suggested the Commission needs to make a recommendation; the Siting Council makes the decision. Chairman Guiliano suggested that if the town really doesn’t want it where they are proposing it the town can write a letter to the Siting Council requesting that the location remain as originally approved. Town Planner Whitten concurred that the Siting Council wants to hear from the town.
Commissioner Saunders questioned if there were other facilities besides Albany? Mr. Atkin reported another in Coventry, Vt, which is a 5 hour drive. Commissioner Tyler questioned if they are in the country witout ambient noise? Mr. Atkin replied affirmatively, but noted there are not a lot of people around the facilities. Commissioner Tyler suggested that would be a good place to get a noise level reading at midnight. Mr. Atkin suggested the engineers will be quieter because they are the next generation; they got their information from the manufacturer. Chairman Guiliano suggested they want to sell you the engines; Commissioner Tyler concurred. Commissioner Tyler suggested the Commission is only asking for a realistic noise level.
Commissioner Matthews questioned if it was possible to design silencers to suppress the noise? Commissioner Tyler suggested it isn’t only the mufflers noise. Mr. Atkin noted the fans will be outside the facility. He submitted the information on the noise levels; the Commission requested a copy of same for their packets and information on the mufflers, generators, etc.
MOTION: To TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
Saunders moved/Ouellette seconded/VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous
The Commission RECESSED at 8:22 P. M. and RECONVENED at 8:27 P. M.
BUSINESS MEETING/(2) Informal Discussion on development of 43 North Road, rear 67 acres; M-1 Zone):
Appearing to discuss this issue was Mike ______________; he noted he is considering purchasing a parcel on Route 140 (43 North Road) which is located near the Mardi Gra bar. The property presently contains the W. B. Mason Warehouse in the front; a 750’ right-of-way continues back to an intermittent unnamed brook. The parcel contains 67 acres and continues on to Enfield; the parcel is impacted by approximately 25% wetlands. The parcel is serviced by existing water, sewer, and utilities from Route 140. Mike ___________ reported they currently operate a construction business in South Windsor, and would like to expand into new markets. They are looking at propety is manchester, South Windsor, and East Windsor. The size of the parcel is more than they need; they
feel it could be used by more than one owner. He will also meet with the Inland/Wetlands Commission, the State Traffic Commission regarding egress from the parcel, and appropriate agencies in Enfield. The question for them is should they develop this parcel as a subdivision, or as a business condominium association with multiple owners.
Mike ____________ questioned if a 1500’ cul-de-sac was allowed? Town Planner Whitten noted the new regulations address residential cul-de-sacs, which are allowed a maximum 800’ length; commercial regulations were not addressed in this revision. She alos noted that a cul-de-sac would be a town road; she questioned if Mike ___________ was talking about a private road? Mike ___________ suggested that would depend on the type of development. Commissioner Tyler suggested a loop road would be acceptable.
Mike __________ suggested the parcel is zoned M-1; because of the set back from the road the parcel wouldn’t be viable for a retail use. He noted one concern is that the parcel is in close proximity to the right-of-way for the signalized intersection (Route 140 and Shoham Road); if they put in a road with heavy (truck) traffic it would tie up Route 140. He suggested they would retain part of the property for their use, and probably put in a material reduction facility and use the land for storage of earth materials, and set up bins for resale (top soil, mulch, sand, and other products), and possibly the installation of a crushing plant. They are looking into taking one area of wetlands and mitigating it with other wetlands area to provide viable storage space; they might consider a
conservation easement to deed the stream to the town for perpetual use. The mitigation of wetlands would require DEP and ACOE Permits. There would probably be at least one structure with office and garage space, then look for tenants to subdivide about 2/3 of the parcel. They would bring an 8” water main in from North Road via the Connecticut Water Company; because of the elevation the sewer would have to be a gravity feed system flowing to a pump station with a force main. Because of the location and configuration of the property and its proximity to I-91 it would be suitable for a variety of uses and it’s far enough away from the road as to not cause problems for the neighbors.
Chairman Guiliano questioned if a crushing plant and storage of gravel, etc. requires a Special Use Permit? Town Planner Whitten indicated a volumn reduction plant/facility requires a Special Use Permit; a contractor’s storage area is just a Site Plan. Chairman Guiliano suggested the crushing facility might be one of the hurdles for the property.
Commissioner Ouellette noted he has been doing traffic review for 20 years for the State of Connecticut, because of the traffic light at Shoham Road the State will not allow a driveway at this location for this complex; it’s a change in use from the current driveway. The sightline is horrendous. The State has installed a special sign for westbound traffic. Commissioner Ouellette questioned if there is any way to get land from an abutter? Mike __________ questioned that the purpose would be to line up his driveway with Shoham Road? Commissioner Ouellette suggested it wouldn’t have to be a true 90 degree angle, but you would have to get the green light at the same time as the Shoham Road light. He suggested he is talking about the geometry on
North Road. Commissioner Ouellette indicated that the State wouldn’t allow the type of facility Mike
__________ is talking about without a light. Mr. _____________ suggested if he filled in “this” wetlands he could mitigate that with 3 or 4 times the area. Commissioner Ouellette questioned if Mr. __________ could get over the wetlands could he build a driveway there? Chairman Guiliano and Mr. ________ both agreed he would have to build the driveway over the wetlands. Commissioner Ouellette cited he’s familar with the regulations; it will not work.
The Commission agreed they would be willing to look at further plans. Mr. ___________ reported they still need to do hydraulic testing, and then make a decision on purchasing the property. He queried Commissioner Ouellette if he felt the biggest problem was with the STC? Commissioner Ouellette replied in his view, yes.
Mr. __________ questioned how the town would embrace a Special Use permit for a crushing facility? Chairman Guiliano noted it is a Special Use Permit Application that requires a Public Hearing. Town Planner Whitten indicated there will be concerns regarding the traffic. Mr. _______ noted the location isn’t near any residences; it’s a god use for the land, if he can address the traffic issues. Commissioner Ouellette suggested he contact the DOT permit office in Rocky Hill to seek advisement from a staff engineer. The STC gets involved when you exceed specific thresholds; it’s not an issue of acreage.
BUSINESS MEETING/(3) Correspondence:
Chairman Guiliano noted receipt of the following:
* Connecticut Federation of Planning and Zoning Agencies Quarterly Newsletter.
* Zoning Bulletin
BUSINESS MEETING/(4) Staff Reports: None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 13, 2006:
Postponed until Commissioner Gowdy is attendance regarding approval.
SIGNING OF MYLARS/PLANS: None.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION: To ADJOURN this Meeting at 8:55 P. M.
Saunders moved/Ouellette seconded/VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous
Respectfully submitted,
Peg Hoffman, Recording Secretary, East Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission
| 
