OLD LYME PLANNING COMMISSION
PUBLIC HEARING & REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 10, 2005
SUBDIVISION – LORDS WOODS – 10 LOTS – LORDS MEADOW DRIVE – APPLICANT: BASSAM AWWA
Exhibit A - An application submitted February 3, 2005.
Exhibit B - Plans dated September 2003 revised thru February 1, 2005
Exhibit C - Legal Notice Published in the New London Day February 28, 2005
& March 7, 2005
Exhibit D - Letter from George James to the Old Lyme Planning Commission dated
February 20, 2005
Exhibit E - Letter from Valerie Votto to the Old Lyme Planning Commission dated
March 2, 2005 on behalf of Mr. & Mrs. Concascia.
Exhibit F - Letter from Thomas E. Metcalf, P.E. to the Old Lyme Planning Commission
Dated March 3, 2005
Exhibit G - Letter from Ann Brown, Inland Wetlands Officer
` dated March 9, 2005 to the Old Lyme Planning Commission
Exhibit H - Letter from Ann Brown, Zoning Enforcement Officer dated March 10, 2005 to the
Old Lyme Planning Commission.
Exhibit I - Letter from James Mattern, Attorney dated March 10, 2005 to the Old Lyme Planning
Commission.
Attorney Mark Block presented the proposed subdivision on behalf of the applicant, Bassam Awwa. Attorney Block stated this application is essentially a resubmission of the prior application that was withdrawn in December of last year solely because the time limit for action by the commission was about to expire and the comments of the town engineer, Mr. Metcalf had not been fully addressed. The applicant is now resubmitting the application. Mr. Block stated it remains a 10 lot subdivision with open space. He noted that legal documents have been provided to Attorney Mattern’s office for his review. The documents provide that the roadway which goes from the extension of Lords Meadow Lane to the cul-de-sac, adjoining Lots 6, 7, and 8, would be deeded to the town as part of
the process and the cul-de-sac may be eventually abandoned in the event that this road were to be extended. He stated that as of the last hearing there were some concerns expressed by the adjoining property owner, Mr. & Mrs. Concascia. He stated that he has submitted a draft agreement to their counsel concerning screening, drainage and lighting.
Mr. Hendriks, Registered Professional Land Surveyor, representing Mr. Bassam Awwa, noted it was important to put everything that had happened in the past into tonight’s public hearing record. Mr. Thompson noted this was not a commission policy. Mr. Hendriks stated the parcel consists of 36 acres with an average lot size of 3.3 acres and is accessed from Lords Meadow via a strip of land. He also noted detailed layout plans have been developed for each of the proposed house sites which include finished grading and leaching systems. Mr. Hendriks stated a lot of time was spent on the exact location of the proposed roadway in order to minimize the amount of impact to the subject site. He stated about one year ago the Inland/Wetland Commission approved the location and
activities for this subdivision and reaffirmed
Page 2 - Minutes
March 10, 2005
that by granting a one-year extension. Therefore, the approval from Wetlands Commission is good through 2006. A complete analysis was done on the site for both percolation, deep test pits, and soil and erosion and the plan fully complies with towns regulations.
Mr. Hendriks stated a sheet has been added to the submittal which addresses the fire suppression for the site. He noted there were some concerns on behalf of the Fire Department that the existing firewells in the area were not adequate to handle fire suppression. There was discussion of providing some direct access to the existing brook that runs through the area, however the Wetlands Commission did not approve that aspect of the application. Therefore, based on conversations with the Fire Department, Planning Commission, and Inland/Wetlands Commission it was felt an alternative would be to provide a 20,000 gallon in ground water tank located at the corner of Lady Slipper Lane and what is currently the end of Lords Meadow Lane.
Mr. Hendriks stated he had been on vacation and had not reviewed Mr. Metcalf’s comments in his letter of March 3, 2005 but he felt a lot of those items have been resolved. Mr. Hendriks read an excerpt from the letter; “in general outstanding engineering items have been satisfactorily addressed, the majority of the items noted in this letter are not engineering, some of the comments are informational and other require input by the applicant to the commission or the commission’s attorney.”
Mr. Hendriks stated he had met with Mr. Concascia prior to the meeting and he has expressed some concerns and he will try to incorporate the solutions into the final plans.
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION:
Steve Ross asked approximately how many minutes of pumping will it take to empty a 20,000 gallon tank noting that about 10% of the tank’s capacity would not be able to be drawn out. Mr. Thompson stated approximately 9 minutes. Mr. Hendriks stated he has tried to compromise between the Wetlands Commission and the Fire Department, however he added that a tank may be an enhancement to the area.
Mr. Ross stated he was quite disappointed that the option of a tank was chosen, and he thought the experienced judgement of the Fire Department was largely ignored. He also stated he thought in this case that a firewell as originally proposed would be a substantially better alternative and he thought the lack of objectivity should be noted.
Chris Kerr stated he agreed with Mr. Ross and would like to have a firewell instead of a tank.
Mr. Pierson asked if the fire tank would be located under the road. Mr. Hendriks stated it will be placed between the edge of the existing pavement and the property line. There will be a pull off area and the tank will be buried along the side of the road with some bollards to protect it. Mr. Pierson asked if there would be a 30-year warranty on the tank. Mr. Hendriks stated it was of fiberglass construction but he was not sure about the warranty. Mr. Pierson asked who would own the tank. Mr. Hendriks stated the Town of Old Lyme would own the tank. Mr. Pierson stated he objected to incurring the responsibility and maintenance of the tank.
Mr. Thompson stated he had spent some time comparing the review letters from Mr. Metcalf dated December 4, 2004 and March 3, 2005 and there still seem to outstanding items. Mr. Hendriks stated just prior to withdrawing the application ninety-nine percent of Mr. Metcalf’s comments had been addressed. Mr. Thompson reiterated the fact that some of the same comments remain in both letters. Mr. Hendriks
Page 3 – Minutes
March 10, 2005
indicated he would be in touch with Mr. Metcalf to resolve the outstanding items. Mr. Thompson stated there was some confusion as to when the road goes down through the development, it stops at the cul-de-sac or is it an easement from the town to the boundary line. Mr. Block stated what is proposed is that the town would ultimately own the road from the property line on the north all the way through down to the end of the proposed road which would be the east end of the brook. The town would have an easement over the cul-de-sac until and if the road is extended.
Mr. Thompson stated the driveways for Lots 7, 8 do not extend beyond the cul-de-sac. The driveways for Lot 6 which has an easement over Lot 7, would also have an easement over the road through to the cul-de-sac for ingress and egress and for utilities until such time as the road would be extended. Mr. Thompson asked if the finished road ends at the cul-de-sac. Attorney Block indicated that was correct. Mr. Thompson asked about plantings along the driveway, lighting and drainage with regard to the Concascia property.
Mr. Hendriks indicated he had met with Mr. Concascia just prior to the meeting and discussed those three concerns. He stated, with respect to the drainage, the extension of the roadway allows us to install a set of catch basins to pick up the water that is currently being dumped into that area right now and carry it into the subject site. He further stated Mr. Concascia is concerned about what happens to his driveway during construction. A temporary by pass will be constructed to allow him to exit the area and ultimately once the roadway is completed a more right angle entrance onto Lords Meadow Lane extension could be developed. The third item is the light impact and Mr. Hendriks stated Mr. Concascia has had the luxury of living toward the end of the road with very little
traffic, however Mr. Awwa has indicated he is more than willing to go the distance to provide some plantings which would help shield the light source from cars as they enter and exit, considering how much light is acceptable the applicant is willing to do as much as he can to minimize light intrusion. Mr. Thompson stated he would like to include some vehicle that the Concascia’s concerns are being addressed and they are captured in the drawing. Attorney Block indicated he had sent a draft agreement to Attorney Votto for her review in addressing the issues raised. Attorney Block summarized he felt the applicant, Mr. Awwa, is willing to work with the Concascia’s to develop an acceptable agreement. Attorney Block also noted legal documents have been forwarded to Attorney Mattern for his review.
Mr. Ross stated he felt that this is a case where the Concascia’s have had the experience of living next to undeveloped land and whenever you do that you take a risk that it will be developed and he felt that the applicant’s representation that they will do their utmost to minimize the subsequent intrusion on their privacy and enjoyment is adequate. He further added you couldn’t totally eliminate any affect of development on formerly undeveloped property.
QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE:
Mike King – 54 Jericho Drive – He stated that the proposal was well done. Mr. King stated his house that faces the road side has a large portion of glass and he would like some plantings that would grow and fill in the area so he would not see so much asphalt. Mr. Hendriks stated that Mr. King’s home was about 14 or 15 feet above the elevation of the roadway. He stated he was aware of that but still would like the area to continue to look natural. Attorney Block stated if you are 14 feet above the roadway in order to satisfy that trees would have to be put in that are 20 feet tall. Mr. King stated he would like to see something planted that will eventually grow, he just did not want to see the asphalt.
Page 4 – Minutes
March 10, 2005
Bob Concascia – 22 Lords Meadow Drive – He asked if the agreement reached between himself and the applicant would be part of this development plan. Mr. Thompson stated since he is an adjacent property and there is concern that your property not be negatively impacted, it is a separate entity from our approval.
Pam Hine – Neighbor – She stated this was the first she had heard of the water tank. She noted she was a bit surprised it was going to be located in her back yard. She asked how big a 20,000 gallon tank is? Mr. Hendriks stated 10 feet in diameter and 40 feet long. Mr. Hendriks stated it would be placed in the right of way and the tank would be suppressed into the ground. She wanted some assurance that the tank would not be an ugly thing that she would be looking at in her backyard. Mr. Hendriks stated the only thing that you would see would be a three-foot manhole sticking up about three feet above the ground. Mr. Thompson suggested she express her opinions to the Inland/Wetlands Commission.
Harold Thompson made a motion to continue the public hearing. Connie Kastelowitz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
SUBDIVISION – THE WOODS AT WHIPPOORWILL - APPLICANT: STEVEN P. AMES
Exhibit A - An application submitted February 3, 2005
Exhibit B - Plans dated January 2005
Exhibit C - Legal Notice Published in the New London Day February 28, 2005 & March 7, 2005
Exhibit D - Letter from Ron Rose, Sanitarian to the Old Lyme Planning Commission
Exhibit E - Letter from George James, to the Old Lyme Planning Commission dated February 20,
2005
Exhibit F - Letter from James Mattern, Attorney to the Old Lyme Planning Commission dated March
10, 2005.
Mr. Hendriks, Registered Professional Land Surveyor, representing Mr. Steven Ames for The Woods at Whippoorwill; a 240-acre parcel of land located on Whippoorwill Road. Mr. Hendriks noted that a large tract of this land was purchased by the Town of Old Lyme and was set aside for open space purposes. Mr. Ames is proposing to develop four lots and a private driveway that will service those four lots. Lot #41 was a lot that was approved by the commission in the last few years. Lot #41-1 was approved as a separate building lot back in the mid 1980’s. At that particular time the lot was approved with a 30-foot easement that extended to Whippoorwill Road. Therefore, this application would include the development of three new lots and the relocation of the property line of Lot #41-1. He noted each individual lot has a proposed site plan for the location of each individual house, well and leaching system. A private driveway approximately 16 feet in width with two foot wide
reinforced shoulders will allow a vehicle to pull off if necessary. The road will end in a hammer head cul-de-sac to provide access to the lots. The application does require two wetlands crossing and some activities close to the wetlands. Mr. Hendriks indicated he has not received comments from Mr. Metcalf.
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION:
Mr. McCarthy asked the length of the proposed driveway. Mr. Hendriks indicated it was about 2,600 feet.
Mr. Pierson stated he thought it was a great use of the land.
Page 5 – Minutes
March 10, 2005
Mr. Thompson stated the Open Space Committee indicated in their letter that the open space requirement has been met.
Mr. Tooker, who built the driveway, indicated that two cars could pass without any problem. He further stated most of the driveway is between 18 and 20 feet.
QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE:
Bill Carey – Asked if there are any plans for the other wood road? Mr. Hendriks stated Lot #41-1 was approved without any direct frontage on Whippoorwill Road and this plan intends to correct that by providing the lot legal frontage, not necessarily access. He further stated at this point there are no plans to develop it, but it could eventually provide access to the other side Lot #41-1 in the event it is impossible to cross the wetlands.
Mr. Davidoesky - What is the intent of access along the Wood Road? This wood road was established 20 years ago, keeping the property lines 15 feet from the centerline of that road. However, if it is not possible to cross the wetlands for access, the wood road could be utilized.
Suzanne Carey – Asked if the upper woods road would be paved. Mr. Hendriks indicated there was no intention to pave either road.
Harold Thompson made a motion to continue the public hearing. Connie Kastelowitz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
SUBDIVISION – KENWOOD, LLC – 11 LOTS – 392 SHORE ROAD – WOOD CREST ESTATES
Mr. Thompson reviewed the correspondence received by the commission from Attorney James Mattern and Thomas Metcalf. Mr. Ross stated he was satisfied with the effort made by the applicant to respond to concerns, criticisms and requirements of other agencies. However, the discrepancies relating to the Wetlands Commission decision will be able to be resolved and they should not have any major bearing on our deliberation. Mr. Pierson stated he felt it was appropriate to act on the application.
Steve Ross made a motion to approve the subdivision, Kenwood, LLC for 11 lots at 392 Shore Road contingent upon approval by the Inland/Wetlands Watercourses commission and any a legal documents that need to be reviewed by the town attorney, and submission of a bonding estimate for applicable requirements. Chris Kerr seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Steve Ross made a motion finding the application consistent with the goals and policies of the Coastal Area Management Act. Chris Kerr seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Page 6 – Minutes
March 10, 2005
SUBDIVISION – FLANDERS 161, LLC – 3 LOTS – 392 SHORE ROAD – SOUTH LYME ESTATES
Mr. Thompson stated that the commission must act on the application and as part of that action the commission must discuss the condition of a waiver of the open space. Mr. Thompson stated that when the application was proposed there was no open space provided in the three-lot subdivision while there would be additional open space provided in the adjacent subdivision. He noted while they are two separate entities the commission sort of reviewed them as a package.
Connie Kastelowitz stated it seemed to her that these divided parcels are two separate entities and that they should not be lumped together just for the purposes of open space.
Mr. Ross exists stated the commission had just discussed The Woods at Whippoorwill and in essence a similar situation in that open space has been provided on another parcel as a separate application. Therefore, there is no requirement for open space for that portion because it was provided on other land. He further stated this is a similar situation where the commission discussed the percentage of open space provided in the Kenwood, LLC eleven lot subdivision was more than the fifteen percent necessary and if the property were still one parcel than it was satisfying our requirements. He noted we did not ask for a fee in lieu of open space on the Ames property so he is wondering why we are back to this again. Mr. Ross suggested a motion to waive the open space with the reason being that it was
provided for when the property was split on the previously approved subdivision.
Connie Kastelowitz stated she felt the Ames property was a totally different situation. The commission agreed at that time that he had given us all the open space that would be required for the whole parcel including the subdivision before the commission presently.
Chris Kerr asked if we got 15% on the eleven lots and 15% on the three lots that would that not be less than what they are giving us on Wood Crest Estates. Mr. James responded by stating that his opinion on complying with the subdivision regulation requirements with regard to open space had been expressed in writing.
Attorney Hollo of Snow & Hollo, LLC stated it was not appropriate for Mr. James to comment after the public hearing. Mr. James stated all of his comments from the Open Space Committee were submitted in writing to the Planning Commission prior to the close of the public hearing. Attorney Hollo stated it was not the time for any other comments other than commission members.
Chris Kerr stated he agreed with Mr. Ross. Mr. McCarthy stated he also agreed with Mr. Ross. He further added our regulations made provisions for us to have alternatives and this seems like a reasonable alternative.
Nancy Strohla stated she agreed with Mrs. Kastelowitz and the Open Space Committee. She felt a fee in lieu of open space should be considered.
Mr. Pierson stated our regulations on open space allow us to grant a waiver on open space and I thought it was more or less trying to establish larger parcels rather than having small isolated pieces. He further stated prior to this if the commission had said at the beginning the commission wanted open space on the two parcels then he would consider it almost a fee in lieu of that we are getting another piece of open space on that eleven lot subdivision in recognition of three lots being granted a waiver.
Page 7 – Minutes
March 10, 2005
Steve Ross made a motion to approve the waiver of the open space on the three lot subdivision for the reasons just discussed, the intent in providing excess amount of open space on a previously approved subdivision that was once part of this parcel satisfies the requirements of our regulations. Robert McCarthy seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Steve Ross made a motion to approve the subdivision, Flanders 161, LLC, three lots contingent upon approval of legal documents by Attorney Mattern, receipt of DOT approval, any outstanding issues with the Town Engineer, Mr. Metcalf; and the find the application consistent with goals and policies of the Coastal Area Management. Chris Kerr seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
LOT LINE MODIFICATION – FMTM, LLC – 252-1 & 254 BOSTON POST ROAD
Harold Thompson made a motion to table any action on this application due to the outstanding deficiencies on the plan. Steve Ross seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
RESUBDIVISION- JAMES MILDRUM – 108 WHIPPOORWILL ROAD.
Harold Thompson made a motion to receive the application for 108 Whippoorwill Road and set it for public hearing next month. Chris Kerr seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
OPEN SPACE ACQUISTION – ARIA LLC.
Mr. James submitted a letter to the commission dated March 7, 2005 outlining the proposal. (see attached)
Mr. James reviewed the proposal with the commission and submitted maps outlining the proposed acquisition of the 40 acre parcel. Steve Ross made a motion in favor of the Open Space Committee further considering the pros and cons of the acquisition. Connie Kastelowitz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
READING AND APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY MINUTES
Steve Ross made a motion to waive the reading of the minutes and approve as submitted. Chris Kerr seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Kim Groves
Land Use Administrator
| 
