TOWN OF EAST WINDSOR
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Public Hearing #1526
April 8, 2008
***** Draft Document – Subject to Commission Review *****
The Meeting was called to order in the Town Hall Meeting Room, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, CT. at 7:02 P. M. by Chairman Ouellette.
ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM:
A quorum was established as four Regular Members (Farmer, Devanney, Gowdy, and Ouellette) and three Alternate Members (Matthews, Thurz, and Tyler) were present. Regular Member Guiliano was absent. Chairman 0ullette noted Alternate Member Thurz would sit in on all Items of Business this evening. Also present was Town Planner Whitten.
ADDED AGENDA FILE: None
RECEIPT OF APPLICATIONS:
Chairman Ouellette acknowledged receipt of the following Applications:
1) Application of Ronald Masters for Modification of Approved Site Plan for construction of a covered pavilion at Scout Hall property located at 28 Abbe Road, owned by the Town of East Windsor. [A-1 Zone; Map 39, Block 23, Lots 8 & 10A].
LEGAL NOTICE:
The following Legal Notice, which appeared in the Journal Inquirer on Thursday, March 27, 2008, and Thursday, April 3, 2008, was read by Chairman Ouellette:
1) Application of Keith Boccaccio for a Special Use Permit to allow a gymnastics school at 84 South Main Street, owned by VMC Realty, Vito Corteze. [TZ5 Zone; Map 28, Block 5, Lot 4].
2) Application of M & L Mason’s Brook, LLC for a Modification to Special Use Permit (Sec. 302) for The Settlement at Mason’s Brook to modify the required unit mix provision to allow up to 15 three-bedroom units. [MFDD Zone; Map 28, Block 6, Lots 46, 47, & 48].
CONTINUED HEARING: Apothecaries Hall Enterprises, LLC. – Special Use Permit/Excavation for the Charbonneau gravel removal operation, new Phases 11, 12, and 13, located on the south side of Apothecaries Hall Road. [M-1, R-3 & Z-1 Zones; Map 36, Block 65, Lots 1 & 7]. (Deadline to close hearing 4/29/08):
Chairman Ouellette read the Hearing description. Appearing to discuss this Application was Jay Ussery, of J. R. Russo & Associates, project engineer; the applicant, Kevin Charbonneau, was present in the audience.
Mr. Ussery noted the Commission had expressed concerns at the previous meeting regarding the separation depth of the proposed excavation vs. the groundwater level. Mr. Ussery submitted a report prepared by Clarence Welti and Associates which describes a boring log showing the materials found in boring holes, the depth to the groundwater, and the top of the ground elevation for each boring. Mr. Ussery referenced on the plans the boring holes, which consist of #B5 and #B7 both located within Phase 11. (See Mr. Welti’s report for specific information). The regulation criteria calls for a separation distance of 8+/- feet between groundwater elevation/depth and excavation. This report confirms the design works and indicates there is a suitable separation distance between
groundwater depth and excavation.
Mr. Ussery also reported they have had no response, despite leaving repeated phone calls and messages, to CL&P regarding the status of their review the Applicant’s plans. He noted several Commission members walked the site. Mr. Ussery reported CL&P had been out to the site approximately 3 years ago to upgrade the lines; they had no access problems at that time. They have used the same design criteria with the submission of the Applicant’s plans that they used on other applications, and expect they will be acceptable to CL&P.
Commissioner Matthews questioned what the site would look like when excavation was completed? What could be done to the site to change it to a more natural look than is required by the regulations? Commissioner Matthews cited he is concerned with the long term use of the property. Mr. Ussery reported there have been many discussions regarding potential uses of the property. It’s been a gravel operation; the end uses haven’t been focused on. Much work was done by other operators and they are not aware of what or how that work was done. There are no sewers in this location, and the North Central Health District (NCHD) is now concerned with former gravel operations in regard to installation of septic systems. Materials have been moved around so the septic
systems fail more quickly than they would in natural materials. They haven’t talked about the uses, although it could be used for row crops, or athletic fields, or maybe a golf course.
Commissioner Matthews cited his second concern is the area on the plans marked “future wash plant area” which seems to be near the groundwater. Mr. Ussery indicated that would be another potential product for the Applicant in the future; such work would require another Special Use Permit before this Commission and a Permit issued through the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).
Chairman Ouellette questioned how they would move around the site; would they move from one phase to another? Mr. Ussery reported in reality they work to supply the product being demanded at that time; it’s not always possible to work in sequential phases. He cited a requirement in Ellington for bonding each phase as it’s opened. Town Planner Whitten indicated they have proposed to put markers on top of the slopes and are submitting plans as they proceed regarding depth; the finished grade must be native soils. Commissioner Matthews indicated he would like to be able to add fill to the site to bring the finished grade back up. Town Planner Whitten noted that request would require another Special Use Permit. Mr. Ussery suggested that once fill was returned to the site they
still couldn’t build houses. Initial testing for septic systems must be done in the native soil profile; then you could add fill but it would require the installation of engineered septic systems.
Discussion followed regarding the one year expiration for the initial permit. It was noted permits have been given historically for one, or sometimes, two years, with subsequent renewals required.
Town Planner Whitten suggested the addition of Condition #40 - “appropriate easement documents must be received from CL&P before the Zoning Permit is issued.”
Chairman Ouellette queried the audience for comments; no one requested to speak.
MOTION: To CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING on the Application of Apothecaries Hall Enterprises, LLC for a Special Use Permit/Excavation for the Charbonneau gravel removal operation, new Phases 11, 12, and 13, located on the south side of Apothecaries Hall Road. [M-1, R-3 & Z-1 Zones; Map 36, Block 65, Lots 1 & 7].
Gowdy moved/Devanney seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous (Devanney/Farmer/Gowdy/Ouellette/Thurz)
MOTION TO APPROVE Application of Apothecaries Hall Enterprises, LLC for a Special Use Permit for the Charbonneau gravel removal operation, ne phases 11, 12 and 13, located on the south side of Apothecaries Hall Road. M-1, R-3 & A-1 Zones. [Map 36, Block 65, Lot#1 & 7] The approval is for a 1-year duration to expire 1 year and 30 days from date of approval. This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans and the following conditions:
Referenced Plans:
“Cover Sheet, Charbonneau Gravel Pit , Apothecaries Hall Road, East Windsor CT prepared for Apothecaries Hall Enterprises, LLC, 125 Edwin Road, South Windsor CT 06074, prepared by J.R. Russo & Associates, 1 Shoham Road, East Windsor, CT 860/623-0569, fax 860/623-2485, dated 1/25/08
Sheet 1/10 - Compilation plan, scale 1”=100’,
Sheet 2-9/10 - Compilation Plans scale 1” = 40’
Sheet 10/10 - Soil Erosion & Sediment Control Notes
CONDITIONS:
Conditions that must be met prior to signing of mylars:
1. The name and phone number of an individual for 24 hour emergency contact for erosion control problems must be noted on the plans. Any changes in the individual responsible for emergency contact must be reported immediately to the Planning and Zoning Department.
2. A $35,000.00 (renewal of existing bond on file) performance bond with additional amount as set by Town Engineer for each additional phase 11, 12, & 13, with surety acceptable to the Town Attorney shall be provided by the applicant prior to the signing of the mylars.
3. 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 that must be met prior to issuance of permits:
4. Two set of final plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets shall be submitted for signature of the commission. The signed plans shall be filed in the Planning & Zoning Office by the applicant prior to issuance of any permits and on the land records
5. A full anti-tracking pad, or similar treatment must be installed prior to the paved apron leading onto Apothecaries Hall Road. Any erosion and sedimentation control measure must first be approved by the Town Engineer
6. In order to ensure the site is graded in accordance with the approved plan, vertical and horizontal control points shall be setup around the entire perimeter of the parcel. Such control points shall be:
a) noted on the approved plan
b) spaced no farther than 200 feet apart; and
c) set in the ground with iron or steel stakes at least ¾ inches in diameter and 30 inches in length.
In addition, the applicant shall be required to provide the Zoning Enforcement Officer with as-built drawings six months after the issuance of the permit to demonstrate compliance with the approved grading plan, Any deviation form the approved plan shall be a violation and cause for revocation of the permit
7. No phase may begin until the previous phase has been substantially completed except for the phase containing the reclamation plan as indicated on the referenced plans.
8. Prior to the start of any new phase, the applicant shall submit evidence of conformance to the approved plans for the previous phases including a certified as-built survey showing finished grades.
General Conditions:
9. A zoning permit shall be obtained prior to the start of any work or new phase. No zoning permit shall be issued until a cash or passbook bond for site restoration, erosion and sedimentation control has been submitted. Such bond shall be good for the life of the permit/project. Any funds that may be withdrawn by the Town for such maintenance shall be replaced within 5 days or this permit shall be rendered null and void.
10. Operation of the gravel pit may include:
a. Temporary grinding of stumps pursuant to the conditions of a Special Permit approval granted on April 8, 1997 and pursuant to provisions of Section 9 and 9A.5.(New section 814)
b. Temporary screening of excavated material pursuant to provisions of Section 9 and 9A.5. (new section 814)
c. Temporary crushing of rock and gravel mined on-site only with portable crushing apparatus and pursuant to provisions of Section 9 and 9A.5*.(new section 814)
d. Excavating, moving, piling, loading and removal of sand, gravel, fill, trees, stumps and brush. “Clean fill” as defined by Connecticut DEP standards may be brought in to the reclamation area to bring grades into conformance with the approved plans.
* Approval of a temporary crushing operation was assumed on August 9, 1994 when, by incorporation into the approved plans, the Commission sanctioned this use. There is no mention in any of the previous motions of a crushing facility, however the use was presented to the Commission at the public hearing on July 12, 1994. Then Planner José Giner advised the Commission on that evening that the “regulations allow for crushing plants as well; both requests (a fueling tank was the other request approved) are items to be decided at the Commission’s discretion.” A subsequent approval on April 8, 1997 was granted with the portable
crusher shown on the plans. It is my opinion that in taking this action, after the effective date of the volume reduction facilities, the Commission made this a conforming use at the site. The stump grinder, screener and excavation activities are all activities that have been explicitly approved through the Special Permit process. Though no reference in any previous motions speak to the crushing operation, its approval is implied through past Commission approval of plans which show the crusher at this location.
11. The final grading shall conform to the proposed final grading as indicated on the referenced plans; but in no case shall any final slope be steeper than a rise to run ratio of 1:3, also knows as a 33% slope.
12. In the event that the operation ceases before all phases are completed, the remaining land shall be graded to leave no slope exceeding 33%.
13. As each area or phase is graded to final contours, the ground shall be back covered with topsoil or loam to render it usable for growing agricultural products. All areas will require a minimum of 6 inches of topsoil in accordance with the regulations.
14. No trees, brush or stumps shall be buried on site.
15. The driveway to the pit shall be maintained in a hard surfaced, paved condition from Windsorville Road inward for a minimum distance of two hundred feet. The driveway shall be cleaned regularly to minimize the dust nuisance created by exiting traffic.
16. An oversized gravel anti-tracking pad leading to the driveway shall be installed and maintained to further minimize dust nuisance.
17. The gate across the driveway into the pit shall be maintained in good condition and kept closed and locked during all times when the pit is not in operation.
18. A stop sign shall be maintained at the entrance to the pit during operating hours in such a way so that outgoing traffic from the pit can be reasonably expected to see it before entering Windsorville Road.
19. A “Private Property – No Trespassing” sign shall be maintained at the entrance to the pit facing outward toward Windsorville Road.
20. The total number of loaded, or partially loaded, outgoing trucks from the pit shall not exceed an average of sixty (60) trucks per day or a maximum of three-hundred (300) trucks in any one week period, counting Monday through Friday.
21. The pit shall not be opened or operated before 7:30 a.m. and shall not be opened or operated later than 5:00 p.m. on weekdays, Monday through Friday.
22. The pit shall not be open or operated on weekends.
23. Measures to minimize the dust nuisance from the site shall be provided by the applicant for review and approval of Town staff. Additional measures are to be undertaken if required by staff if field conditions necessitate.
24. The “Best Management Practices” outlined by the Hartford County Natural Resource Conservation Service shall be adhered to.
25. The applicant shall adhere to all conditions of their Inland Wetlands Permit.
26. The vegetation (trees) to be removed shall be accomplished in one step and the topsoil shall be stripped off and stockpiled immediately or a temporary vegetative cover implemented.
27. Certified as-builts showing contours of completed and active areas shall be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department no later than July 1 of each year that this permit is in effect.
28. Finished grades may not be closer than 8’ to the water table.
29. There shall be no on-site maintenance of equipment unless it is a clear emergency. Town staff shall be notified if such emergency exists.
30. There shall be no bulky waste or debris disposal allowed on the site. The operator of the pit shall provide adequate security measures to prevent unauthorized waste disposal. Any unauthorized disposal shall be cleaned up and disposed of off site by the operator of the pit.
31. The project shall be carried out in phases as shown on the plans.
32. All trucks and equipment shall be parked off-street.
33. Upon completion of the excavation, the land shall be cleared of all debris and a minimum of six (6) inches of topsoil shall be spread over any disturbed areas.
34. Additional drainage and erosion control measures are to be installed as directed by town staff if field conditions necessitate.
35. Any modifications to the proposed drainage for the site plan is subject to the approval of the town engineer.
36. This project shall be executed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans and conditions. Minor modifications to the approved plans which result in lesser impacts may be allowed subject to staff review and approval.
37. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.
38. This approval shall expire one year plus 30 days from date of approval or upon completion of the project, whichever occurs first ,and is renewable on an annual basis..
39. All requirements of Section 814 of East Windsor Zoning regulations effective October 1, 2007 shall apply to this permit.
Additional Condition:
40. Appropriate easement documents must be received from CL&P before Zoning
Permit is issue.
Gowdy moved/Devanney seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous (Devanney/Farmer/Gowdy/Ouellette/Thurz)
NEW HEARING: Keith Boccaccio – Special Use Permit to allow a gymnastics school at 84 South Main Street, owned by VMC Realty, Vito Cortese. [TZ5 Zone; Map 28, Block 5, Lot 4] (Deadline to close hearing 5/13/08):
Chairman Ouellette read the Hearing description. Appearing to discuss this Application was Keith Boccaccio.
Mr. Boccaccio reported the site is a 154’ x 50’ warehouse type building, with a wall separating the first 100’ from the remainder of the building. He is proposing to operate a gymnastic studio in the first 100’ of the area. Classes would typically run 1 to 1 1/2 hours from 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.; class size would be approximately 5 to 7 students instructed by 2 teachers. Parents would typically drop off their children and return to pick them up. Mr. Boccaccio would be allotted 12 parking spaces in the front of the building; 9 more could potentially be used on the side of the building. Chairman Ouellette questioned if there was an agreement with regard to the assignment of parking spaces? Town Planner Whitten noted the parking for this site is not adequate
for the size of the building; additional gravel parking was added for the residential use adjacent to this building. Mr. Cortese’s business uses 9 spots; Town Planner Whitten noted she has never seen more than 2 or 3 cars in that location. She felt this use was good for the site because of the later hours of operation. Commissioner Devanney questioned if Mr. Boccaccio would operate the gymnastic studio on Saturday; Mr. Boccacio reported 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Chairman Ouellette questioned if Mr. Boccaccio planned any large events, such as demonstrations, competitions, or recitals? Mr. Boccaccio indicated he is hoping to work out an agreement with the high school to use their parking lot for parking for larger events; Town Planner Whitten noted agreement with the high school would be required. Mr. Boccaccio also noted some competitions are held in high school gyms or outside; he might have to rent other facilities for recitals,
etc.
Mr. Boccaccio hopes to use the 6’ x 3’ sign in the front for business identification. Chairman Ouellette suggested Mr. Boccaccio work with staff on signage. Chairman Ouellette questioned if any new lighting would be installed; he noted the Commission doesn’t want to see flood lights on large poles. Mr. Boccaccio indicated he would like to install lights on the outside. Town Planner Whitten noted they must be down-lit lighting; lighting also requires Staff approval.
Chairman Ouellette questioned if there were other similar facilities in the area? Mr. Boccaccio indicated other locations are in Windsor Locks, Tolland, East Longmeadow and Agawam.
Town Planner Whitten questioned if visitor seating would be installed, and, if so, how much? Mr. Boccaccio indicated he plans to put in a 10’ to 15’ x 30’ two story office in the front of the building; the second floor would provide a spectator viewing area.
Chairman Ouellette queried the audience for comments; no one requested to speak.
MOTION: To CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING on the Application of Keith Boccaccio – Special Use Permit to allow a gymnastics school at 84 South Main Street, owned by VMC Realty, Vito Cortese. [TZ5 Zone; Map 28, Block 5, Lot 4]
Gowdy moved/Farmer seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous (Devanney/Farmer/Gowdy/Ouellette/Thurz)
MOTION TO APPROVE, the application of Keith Boccaccio, requesting a Special Use Permit to conduct a commercial indoor gymnastics studio 84-D South Main Street, owned by VMC Realty, Inc, c/o Vito Cortese ,zoned TZ-5 (Map 28, Block 5, Lot 44), This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans (as may be modified by the Conditions) and the following conditions:
Referenced Plans:
- Existing Conditions Map for Vito Cortese, 80-82 South Main Street, East Windsor, CT , scale 1” = 20’, dated September 22, 2005, last revised 12/20/05, prepared by Kratzert, Jones & Associates, Inc., P.O. Box 337, 1755 Meriden-Waterbury Road, Milldale, CT 06467-0337
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. Two final mylars, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets shall be submitted for signature of the Commission. One shall be filed on the Town Land Records, and one filed with the Planning and Zoning Department
Conditions which must be met prior to certificates of compliance:
4. 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:
5. 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.
6. A Zoning Permit shall be obtained prior to the commencement of any site work.
7. 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.
8. Any modifications to the proposed drainage or grading for the site plan is subject to the approval of the town engineer.
9. Additional erosion control measures are to be installed as directed by town staff if field conditions necessitate.
10. 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
11. Cars may not at anytime be parked in landscaped or non-paved areas, unless approved as such on the site plan.
12. All required landscaping shall be adequately maintained.
Additional Condition:
13. Any proposed lighting must be approved by the Planning Department.
Gowdy moved/Devanney seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous (Devanney/Farmer/Gowdy/Ouellette/Thurz)
NEW HEARING: M & L Mason’s Brook, LLC – Modification to Special Use Permit (Sec. 302) for The Settlement at Mason’s Brook to modify the required unit mix provision to allow up to 15 three-bedroom units. [MFDD Zone; Map 28, Block 5, Lots 46, 47, & 48] (Deadline to close hearing 5/13/08):
Chairman Ouellette read the Hearing description. Appearing to discuss this Application was Attorney T. Mark Barbieri, representing the Applicant, M & L Mason’s Brook, LLC; Don Poland, of Connecticut Planning & Development, LLC, planning consultant; and Jay Ussery, of J. R. Russo & Associates, project engineer. Also present were Gary Merrigan, and Daryl LeFebvre, partners in M & L Mason’s Brook, LLC.
Attorney Barbieri submitted the affidavit regarding posting of signage for the Public Hearing.
Attorney Barbieri reported this development has been approved under a common interest ownership/condominium type development containing 18 single family homes with dedicated yard areas as well as common areas. This is a clustered-type of subdivision with a unit mix under the old regulations of 20% three bedroom units, with the remaining homes being one or two bedroom units. Attorney Barbieri indicated the thought was that they would attract the over 55 buyers, but people have been looking at the homes because of the affordability of the units at $300,000+/-. The Applicants have built seven units, including 3 three bedroom units and 4 two bedroom units. All of the three bedroom units have sold, while only one of the two bedroom units have been sold.
Attorney Barbieri noted the Applicant returned to the Commission a year ago requesting an Amendment to the Regulations to change the unit mix. The Commission was not in favor of that proposal, citing a concern for the prevalence of more school aged children and the amendment would open more multi-family developments to more three bedroom units, which would allow more school aged children. Due to the inability to market the development as approved the Applicant has returned tonight to submit an Application via a waiver provision allowed under new regulations.
Mr. Poland talked at great length of the change in neighborhood demographics, both in Connecticut and nationally, since the initial approval of this development. To support his information Mr. Poland referenced a study prepared by Rutgers University on Residential Demographic Multipliers for Connecticut, which indicates that the number of children per households has decreased over the years. Mr. Poland reviewed the change in the type of housing from the 1940’s to today, citing the preference for an increased size home requiring more bedrooms, more baths, and larger attached garages. Under the current predominantly two bedroom unit mix Mr. Poland suggested the subject development falls short of the requirements of the current homebuyer, causing difficulty selling the units being built. Mr.
Poland felt this deficiency would also prove difficult for the current homebuyer in the resale market.
Mr. Poland then turned his attention to the restriction to two bedroom units relative to the concern for increasing the number of school aged children and their related cost of local education. He referenced the Rutgers University, Center for Urban Policy Research Residential Demographic Multipliers for Connecticut study which addressed common assumptions based on perceptions of traditional households, and the resulting over-inflation of the estimated/anticipated number of school aged children generated by residential development. The study suggests current perceptions fail to recognize the change in non-traditional household structure. Mr. Poland continued his discussion for some time, referencing various charts and tables, and relating them to the subject development. Mr. Poland
concluded by noting that applying the Rutgers multipliers to the subject development would result in less than 1 school aged child per unit. Mr. Poland suggested the per child cost of education for the Town of East Windsor is approximately $10,000. As approved the development is anticipated to generate 4.62 school aged children, while the development as proposed under this waiver would generate 9.42 school aged children. Mr. Poland suggested the net increase of 4.80 school aged children spread out over the total number of project units (18) results in 1 school aged child per 3.75 units. Mr. Poland then referenced the total real property taxes generated by the development, noting the property taxes exceeds the cost of education.
Attorney Barbieri noted there would be no exterior changes to the development as a result of this proposal; the footprint of the project would not change. He suggested this proposal meets the following requirements of Section 302 - Modifications to Regulations: 1) no adverse impact on health, safety, or welfare; 2) no significant adverse effect on adjacent properties; 3) the property, unlike other land in the area, is uniquely affected by features that cause exceptional difficult or unusual hardship in meeting the regulation requirements; and 4) complies with the Plan of Conservation and Development. Mr. Poland suggested the Applicant chose not to go for a text amendment as that would open the change to all condominiums and multi-family developments. They also preferred not to go
through the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) to circumvent the Zoning Regulations. For those reasons they felt the best approach was to modify this development only.
MOTION: To TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
Gowdy moved/Devanney seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous (Devanney/Farmer/Gowdy/Ouellette/Thurz)
The Commission RECESSED at 8:55 and RECONVENED at 9:05 p.m.
Commissioner Gowdy questioned if, in his report, Mr. Poland had taken into consideration the utilization of the current school system in East Windsor? Is the school system maxed out, or can it take on an influx? Mr. Poland indicated he didn’t have current school data available as the school system was unable to get back to him prior to the preparation of his report. He recalled that the portable units were installed in 2003 to deal with the baby boomer peak but he felt there was still room for growth. Mr. Poland didn’t feel there would be an overall population increase. Commissioner Gowdy suggested there are households which include four to five children. If the housing market goes down to the point where these units are being marketed for $200,000 to $250,000 maybe
the families with four to five children could live in these units, which would cause an influx in school population. Mr. Poland didn’t feel there were many of those households out there. He also didn’t feel there would be a bottoming out of the housing market as there was in the 1980s; Connecticut housing values have stayed high relative to the national values.
Commissioner Farmer requested a clarification of the intent of the proposal. Mr. Poland indicated the request was for a modification to remove the 80% restriction totally from this project only. He reviewed the reasoning for the waiver request vs. a text amendment, which would apply to all multi-family developments, vs. a ZBA application. Commissioner Farmer cited concern for the approval would set a precedent for future applications. Mr. Poland suggested he agrees with the regulations as written for apartments, which he felt was the Commission’s concern; he didn’t see the need to impose the same restrictions on single family developments.
Commissioner Matthews disagreed with the education cost quoted by Mr. Poland; he felt the per child cost was higher. He didn’t feel the project was a plus for the town. He cited the high cost of police protection compared to the Town of Ellington. Commissioner Matthews suggested there are 600 students in the elementary school designed for 500 students; the lack of available space was provided by the temporary classrooms. While the numbers presented by Mr. Poland are relatively small he noted the town is also adding the population of the three bedroom apartments on North Road. He cited concern for a surge of 30 - 40 students. Mr. Poland suggested households are changing; many are getting combined. He suggested there is stagnation in population.
Chairman Ouellette felt this proposal was no different than a single family subdivision. Commissioner Tyler felt the market today is for the three bedroom home. He felt the intent of the Commission was to restrict the number of bedrooms in apartments; he didn’t recall any discussion on single family homes. Commissioner Farmer noted that although the Town isn’t willing to pay for the cost of student education he didn’t agree with the principal of restricting the number of bedrooms. Commissioner Gowdy concurred with Commissioner Tyler; the concern was restricting the number of bedrooms in apartments. Commissioner Thurz cited the Applicant development in Windsor Locks which didn’t have many kids; he had no problem with the proposal as presented.
Chairman Ouellette opened discussion to the audience:
Scott Stanton, 103 South Main Street: operates a business across the road from the project, he felt it doesn’t look good for the Town to have an under-developed project on a main road. He also didn’t anticipate a huge influx of children.
Dan Merrigan: is a licensed real estate agent marketing the project, people are looking for this type of development but are looking for that third bedroom; just because the third bedroom is there doesn’t mean it will be used by children. He has turned away several potential buyers.
Town Planner Whitten suggested she believes the unit mix makes sense for a large apartment complex because it’s a transient population but she didn’t feel the unit mix was a good thing with this type of project. She didn’t think the unit mix was good even during the original approval process. While we need to be concerned about the cost of education for children she felt it was setting a bad precedent to zone against children. The Applicant has shown there is no market for the two bedroom units. It makes sense to have this development act as a single family development rather than an apartment complex; there are no other developments like this in town.
Chairman Ouellette questioned the number of bedrooms in the over 55 development? Mr. Poland indicated that initially it was thought the over 55 population wanted to downsize to 1300 to 1700 square feet including 2 bedrooms and a 2 car garage, but developers found out that the over 55 population were downsizing from a 4,000 square foot house with 5 bedrooms, and downsizing to them was 2200 square feet with 3 bedrooms. The trend has been to increase the square footage and the number of bedrooms because people want the option of a guest room, and if they became ill, someone over 18 could move in with them.
MOTION: To CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING on the Application of M & L Mason’s Brook, LLC – Modification to Special Use Permit (Sec. 302) for The Settlement at Mason’s Brook to modify the required unit mix provision to allow up to 15 three-bedroom units. [MFDD Zone; Map 28, Block 5, Lots 46, 47, & 48]
Gowdy moved/Devanney seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous (Devanney/Farmer/Gowdy/Ouellette/Thurz)
MOTION TO APPROVE Application of M & L Mason’s Brook, LLC for a Modification to Special Use Permit (Sec 302) for The Settlement at Mason’s Brook to modify the required mix provision to allow up to 15 three bedroom units [MFDD zone; Map 28, Block 5, Lots 46, 47 & 48]
Referenced Plans:
Should this modification be approved, the approved filed map should be amended to reflect the permitted unit mix, and reference to the filed maps be shown on the special use permit to be filed.
Conditions that must be met prior to signing of mylars:
1. 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 that must be met prior to issuance of permits:
2. Two final mylars, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets shall be submitted for signature of the Commission. One shall be filed on the Town Land Records, and one filed with the Planning and Zoning Department
General Conditions:
3. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.
Gowdy moved/Farmer seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous (Devanney/Farmer/Gowdy/Ouellette/Thurz)
NEW BUSINESS: Southern Auto Sales, Inc. – Site Plan Approval for construction of a 4,400 sq. ft. car wash building at 161 South Main Street. [B-2 & A-1 Zones; Map 34, Block 21, Lot 66] (Deadline for decision 5/29/08):
Chairman Ouellette read the description of this Item of Business. Appearing to discuss this Application was Attorney T. Mark Barbieri, representing the Applicant; and Jay Ussery, of J. R. Russo & Associates, project engineer.
Attorney Barbieri turned discussion over to Mr. Ussery. Mr. Ussery reported the proposal is a Site Plan Application for a new 4,400 square foot car wash on the 161 South Main Street parcel. The dashed line on the plans shows the edge of the bituminous parking lot; the car wash would be located in an area near where the majority of the cars going to auction are staged. The car wash would be south of the gated construction entrance to this parcel which is located on Phelps Road. The car wash is high speed wash which would remove dust from the cars before they go through the auction lines. Water for the car wash would come in from Phelps Road via public water supplied by the Connecticut Water Company. If other future development happens the Applicant may run a water loop entering from
Route 5. The car wash would contain 2 bays/2 lanes presently, although that could increase to an additional 3 bays/3 lanes in the future. There is a three 1500 gallon tank recycling system; water then moves through an oil/water separator, and exits through the existing storm drainage. The car wash will also contain a small office and toilet facilities. Utilities will come in off of Phelps Road. The car wash would run during business hours Monday and Tuesday 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Wednesday morning. The car wash would not be operated at night.
Town Engineer Norton has reviewed the plans. Mr. Ussery noted they must appear before the Water Pollution Control Authority (WPCA) because this would require a new sewer connection. Town Engineer Norton is seeking more information regarding the number of cars utilizing the wash. Mr. Ussery felt they might wash 2500 cars on a busy week. They would not be increasing the number of cars being washed, as cars are being washed now at other Southern Auto Sales (SAS) locations. This facility is more strategically located relative to the location of the cars going to auction. The closest residence on Phelps Road would be located 800+/- feet from this proposed car wash. Mr. Ussery and Attorney Barbieri reported SAS has received complaints in the past regarding lighting being on day and night but
upon investigation the lighting was located on the Army Reserve building.
Town Planner Whitten questioned the noise level for the car wash, noting high pressure operations can be loud. She noted has received complaints about the vacuum cleaners at the car wash across from Pasco’s. Mr. Ussery felt it would be a problem, as the operation occurs inside the building.
MOTION TO APPROVE the Application of Southern Auto Sales, Inc for a site plan modification to construct a 4,400 sq.ft. car wash building at 161 South Main Street. B-2 & A-1 ,Zones Map 34, Blk 21 Lot 66. 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 1 /6 – Cover Sheet/Location Map – Southern Auto Sales, Inc, East Lot Car Wash,161 South Main Street, East Windsor, CT prepared for Southern Auto Sales, Inc, 161 South Main Street, East Windsor, CT 06088 860/292-7500 prepared by J.R. Russo & Associates, 1 Shoham Road, East Windsor, CT 06088 860/623-0569 fax: 860/ scale: 1”=400', dated 10/1/07, last revised 3/21/08
- Sheet 2/6 - General Location Survey - scale 1” = 200’
- Sheet 3 & 4/6– Site Plan 1” = 40’ scale 1” = 40’
- Sheet 5/6 – Erosion control Notes
Sheet 6/6 Detail Sheet
Conditions which must be met prior to signing of mylars:
13. All final plans submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for preparation of the plans.
14. 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:
15. One set of final mylars, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets shall be submitted for signature of the Commission. Mylar shall be filed in the Planning and Zoning Department.
16. 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:
17. Final grading and seeding shall be in place or a bond for the unfinished work submitted.
18. Final as-built survey showing all structures, pins, driveways and final floor elevations as well as spot grades shall be submitted.
19. 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:
20. 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.
21. A Zoning Permit shall be obtained prior to the commencement of any site work.
22. 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.
23. Any modifications to the proposed drainage or grading for the site plan is subject to the approval of the town engineer.
24. Additional erosion control measures are to be installed as directed by town staff if field conditions necessitate.
25. 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
26. Any/All required landscaping shall be adequately maintained.
Gowdy moved/Devanney seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous (Devanney/Farmer/Gowdy/Ouellette/Thurz)
BUSINESS MEETING/(1) Discussion - Sewer Service Area:
Town Planner Whitten noted members of the WPCA and Bill Hogan, of the DEP, will attend the Commission’s next meeting on April 22nd to discuss issues related to the Sewer Service Area map.
BUSINESS MEETING/(2) Fee Schedule: Tabled.
BUSINESS MEETING/(3) Correspondence: None.
BUSINESS MEETING/(4) Staff Reports: Nothing additional.
SIGNING OF MYLARS/PLANS, MOTIONS:
* Herb Holden Trucking, Inc. - motion
APPROVAL OF MINUTES/March 25, 2008:
MOTION: To APPROVE the Minutes of Public Hearing #1525 dated March 25, 2008 as written.
Gowdy moved/Devanney seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous (Devanney/Farmer/Gowdy/Ouellette/Thurz)
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION: To ADJOURN this meeting at 10:25 p.m.
Devanney moved/Gowdy seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous (Devanney/Farmer/Gowdy/Ouellette/Thurz)
Respectfully submitted,
Peg Hoffman, Recording Secretary, East Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission
| 
