MINUTES
Newtown Planning and Zoning Commission
SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
Land Use Office Regular Meeting
Council Chamber July 18 2013
Primrose Street, Newtown, Connecticut
Present: Ms. Dean, Mr. Mulholland, Mr. Porco and Mr. Swift. Alternates: Mr. Spragg seated for Ms. Brymer, Mr. Pozek and Mr. Corigliano. Also present: George Benson, Land Use Agency Director. Clerk: Ms. Wilkin
The meeting was opened at 7.38 p.m. Notice is made that the entire meeting was taped and can be heard in the Planning and Zoning Office, Municipal Building, 3 Primrose Street, Newtown, Connecticut
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Application by Toll CT lll Limited Partnership for a zone map change to add approximately 190 feet depth to the existing BPO zone with corresponding reduction in the EH-10 zone, 176 Mt. Pleasant Road, Newtown, Connecticut, as shown on a certain set of plans entitled “Proposed Amendment to Special Exception and Zone Map Change, Newtown Woods 12-16 Pocono Road and Mt. Pleasant Road (Route 6) Newtown, Connecticut” dated May 7, 2013, scale various, Assessor’s Map 2, Block 5, Lot 31
Application by Toll CT lll Limited Partnership for a two lot re-subdivision, 176 Mt. Pleasant Road and 12-16 Pocono Road, Newtown, Connecticut, as shown on a certain set of plans entitled “Proposed Amendment to Special Exception and Zone Map Change, Newtown Woods 12-16 Pocono Road and Mt. Pleasant Road (Route 6), Newtown, Connecticut” dated May 7, 2013, scale various, Assessor’s Map 2, Block 5, Lot 31
Application by Toll CT lll Limited Partnership for an amendment to a special exception to reduce the approved area for the Newtown Woods project from 49.24 acres to 48.07 acres, 176 Mt. Pleasant Road and 12-16 Pocono Road, Newtown, Connecticut, as shown on a certain set of plans entitled “Proposed Amendment to Special Exception and Zone Map Change, Newtown Woods 12-16 Pocono Road and Mt. Pleasant Road (Route 6Z) Newtown, Connecticut” dated May 7, 2013, scale various, Assessor’s Map 2, Block 5, Lot 31
Application by Toll CT lll Limited Partnership for an extension to an amendment to a special exception to allow a temporary sales office at 176 Mt. Pleasant Road, Newtown, Connecticut
The above four hearings were heard together.
Ms. Dean read the call for the hearings and the correspondence in the file, after which she asked to hear from the applicant.
Robert Hall, Esq., 43 Main Street, Newtown, Connecticut, representing the applicant went through the history of the property, which was detailed in binders that were distributed and submitted. He also submitted the Certificate of Notification and a certified copy of the Deed. In 1967 the owner, Dr. Draper, requested a zone change from residential to professional 300 ft. from the center line. In 2008 the Commission changed the professional zone to BPO, which is what it is today. Congregate living was considered half a unit. March 1998 the zone changed from residential to EH-10, which allowed ten units per acre instead of five. The next change in May, 1999 divided the property into two parts. The peninsular of land was never designated as a conservation easement on Map 7883.
Ted Hart, P.E., Melone & McBroome, 99 Realty Drive, Cheshire, Connecticut explained the proposed changes on a map currently named 2 which become 2A and 2B.
Mr. Mulholland asked the purpose for the zone change if nothing is planned to go into the space.
Gregory Kamedulski, Toll Brothers, 53 Church Street, Newtown, Connecticut said that the proposed sales office on site will not be ready till early 2014, whereas the permit for the trailer expires October, 2013.
Mr. Mulholland advised that there was a well attended discussion regarding the sales office. It was approved as a temporary location for two years, after which time the property should be returned to its natural state. Although the property has changed hands a few times, the original agreement should be honored.
Mr. Hall stated that the site where the sales office is located is zoned BPO and therefore not intended to be in its natural state. He added that Maplewood Senior Living plans to purchase lot 2B at which time they will come before the Commission with an application.
Thomas Beecher, Collins Hannafin, P.C., 148 Deer Hill Avenue, Danbury, Connecticut, representing Liberty of Newtown Association said that as a resident and board member they are very concerned about this matter and would like all four applications denied. Unit 23 Franklin Court is right on the line where the BPO starts. Residents of Liberty advised constantly of their concern about having a buffer to protect privacy. He sent a letter, which is in the file stating their concerns. He also advised that the residents were promised many times and at the public hearing of October 6, 2011 that the sales office would be returned to its original state. If these applications are approved it will have a detrimental impact on the neighbors.
Ms. Dean asked to hear from the public
Donald Leonard, 38 Joelle Court, Newtown, Connecticut read a prepared statement that was placed in the file. He also submitted letters in opposition from Liberty residents unable to attend the meeting. He noted that signs to the Sales Office point to the site, not the trailer, which does not appear to be used as a sales office.
Carolyn Settzo, I Franklin Court, Newtown, Connecticut agreed with the previous speaker adding that she was directed to the sales office on site, not the trailer.
Arthur Miller, Maplewood Senior Living, One Gorham Island, Westport, Connecticut advised that they have developed throughout Newtown. They are moving to develop a medical center on this site. They usually meet with the neighbors to discus their concerns. He noted that the Commission mentioned screening.
Ms. Dean advised that the screening was intended to block any development from Liberty residents.
Susan Reese, 11 Franklin Court, Newtown, Connecticut expressed concern about parking stating that it would not be a good location.
Heidi Winslow, 62 Joelle Court, Newtown, Connecticut advised that the Liberty residents were assured that the adjoining property would not be developed. The applicant needs to prove the need for zone change otherwise the Commission has the right to deny an application. She added that there have been all sorts of signs without the appropriate permits pointing to the sales office on site. There is no need to keep the trailer any longer than allowed.
Anthony Salvato, 19 Franklin Court, Newtown, Connecticut said that Malewood has a financial interest in the property. The residents of Liberty also have financial investments in their homes.
Mitchell Tschantz, 13 Franklin Court, Newtown, Connecticut advised of the currently difficulty turning left onto Route 6, adding that it will only get worse. He asked to deny the applications.
Mr. Hall stated that there were no plans for development of the property. This would only be an ownership change. There are no plans to keep the trailer. He noted that once the Grace Church property is developed they would also be abutting Liberty. The traffic problem would be addressed when an application comes before the Commission. It is a prime spot for a medical building. He felt the first three applications should be approved.
The hearings were closed at 9:10 p.m. at which time a short recess was called.
The meeting reconvened at 9:25 p.m.
DISCUSSION
Ms. Dean stated that she struggled with EH10 regulations and was reluctant to make an allowance for the sales trailer. There are a lot of problems with the culvert in front. They were not held to the same standard as a permanent building. The Commission is under no obligation to make zone changes. There are already medical buildings on that road as well as some proposed. She added that the peninsular was intended as a buffer.
Mr. Mulholland was on the Commission when there was a heated debate about the sales office. The protection of trees was also discussed. Once the Grace Church property is developed the building would be visible from Liberty because the trees were dropped. There was considerable discussion about the traffic, screening and returning the lot to its natural state. They also heard from Pocono Road residents and those across the street. He asked that Toll Brothers agree to the 2007 stipulations. He agreed that the sales signs point to the property not the trailer.
Mr. Porco said that the Commission cannot prevent development on their own property, but they do not have to change the zone. The trailer was supposed to be there for only two years. It is currently being used by the architects.
Mr. Benson said that there should not be two zones on one property, but the Commission does not have to change zones.
ACTION
Action on these applications will be taken at the next meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Application by the Town of Newtown Planning and Zoning Commission for update to the Town of Newtown Plan of Conservation and Development as contained in a draft document entitled “Plan of Conservation and Development 2013 Draft Article VI “ Economic Development” dated June 25, 2013
The Commission will open this hearing at the next meeting
Application by the Town of Newtown Planning and Zoning commission for an amendment to the Subdivision Regulations at Article IV, Section 4.06.200 pertaining to elimination of the requirement for common driveway bonds as contained in a certain document dated June 13. 2013
The hearing was opened at 10:25 p.m.
Ms. Dean read the call for the hearing and the correspondence in the file. Because there were no members of the public present the hearing was closed at 10:25 p.m.
ACTION
Ms. Dean moved the following:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Newtown Planning and Zoning Commission that the application by the Town of Newtown Planning and Zoning Commission for an amendment to the Subdivision Regulations at Article IV, Section 4.06.200 pertaining to elimination of the requirement for common driveway bonds as contained in a certain document dated June 13, 2013.
ARTICLE IV – SUBSTANTIVE PROVISIONS
4.06 Driveway and Parking Standards
Delete sentence below “Estimates … Improvement.”
4.06.200 If the final subdivision plan proposes the creation of rear lots with access strips as permitted by Section 7.04.900 through 7.04.950 of the Newtown Zoning Regulations and two such strips adjoin each other, the supplemental map shall show, in addition to driveways wholly within each lot as required above, a single, common driveway constructed of bituminous concrete not less than 16 feet wide from the street to the point where the shorter of (or both of) the access strips terminate, together with turnouts to permit passage of emergency vehicles at such intervals as dictated by good engineering practice. The common driveway may be anywhere within the two access strips. Estimates of the cost of construction of the driveway and associated drainage and landscaping shall be submitted by the professional engineer and
included within the subdivision bond. The common driveway, drainage and associated landscaping shall be constructed by the subdivider as a subdivision improvement. The subdivider shall submit with the subdivision application an executed covenant and dedication establishing a cross easement on the shared access strips permitting ingress an egress by all lawful means and for all lawful purposes in favor of each lot, together with a requirement that the owner of each lot will, after both lots are improved, share equally the cost of, at the minimum, plowing and pothole repair. A lot shall be considered improved if construction of a structure other than the common driveway has begun on the lot.
SHALL BE APPROVED
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the amendment is consistent with the Town of Newtown Plan of Conservation and Development
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the amendment shall become effective on July 29, 2013
Seconded by Mr. Spragg
Vote: Ms. Dean Yes
Mr. Mulholland Yes
Mr. Porco Yes
Mr. Swift Yes
Mr. Spragg Yes
Motion approved.
PUBLIC HEARING (Continued)
Application by the Town of Newtown Planning and Zoning Commission for update to the Town of Newtown Plan of Conservation and Development
Ms. Brymer sent out information for comments. The entire document is almost complete. Members will be assigned sections to proofread. Then the entire document will be put on the Agenda for public hearing.
COMMUNICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE
Land Use Agency Director’s Comments
Nothing at this time.
Approval of Minutes
Mr. Spragg made a motion to approve the Minutes of June 6, 2013 as submitted. Seconded by Mr. Mulholland. Motion approved.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Pozek made a motion to adjourn. Seconded by Mr. Mulholland. The motion was unanimously approved.
The meeting adjourned at 10:34 p.m.
| 
