MEMBERS PRESENT: Timothy Wentzell, Kevin McCann, Patrick Kennedy, Sue Larsen, Suzanne Choate, and Bart Pacekonis
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Michael Sullivan sat for Clifford Slicer
Gary Bazzano
Marc Finer
STAFF PRESENT: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning
Jeffrey Doolittle, Town Engineer
PUBLIC HEARING – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Wentzell called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
Larsen read the legal notice as it was published in the Journal Inquirer.
1. Appl #04-75P, Adams Lawn Service, request for a 5 year major home occupation to operate a lawn service at property at 1224 Sullivan Avenue, A-20 zone
Adam Thibedeau was present for this application.
Banach provided the following Planning report:
1. This is an application for a 5-year major home to run a lawn mowing service from property located at 1224 Sullivan Ave, A-20 zone.
2. The applicant has submitted a narrative defining the scope of the business. He has indicated that he has one trailer for his equipment and that he leaves the site daily at 8 am and returns around 3:30 pm. This occurs Monday through Friday with an occasional Saturday.
3. The trailer is stored in the rear of the property and screened by a stockade fence. The applicant has provided pictures of the property.
4. The reasons for requiring PZC approval are to ensure that:
¨ the home occupation is clearly secondary to the use of the building for dwelling purposes;
¨ the home occupation is compatible with other permitted residential uses in the residential district;
¨ the residential character of the dwelling and the neighborhood are preserved, and;
¨ all residents have freedom from excessive noise, excessive traffic, nuisances, fire hazards offensive odors and pollutants, and other possible effects of commercial uses being conducted in residential areas.
5. Performance criteria that must be met include:
¨ Maximum of 25% of the floor area can be used for the occupation;
¨ occupation cannot be visible from outside the dwelling unit;
¨ dwelling must contain the character of a single family dwelling;
¨ no entrance or exit may be added solely for the occupation;
¨ no more than one non-resident employee allowed;
¨ the occupation cannot create a volume of passenger or commercial traffic that is inconsistent with the normal level of traffic on the street;
¨ all parking needs must be met on-site; and
¨ the Commission may require screening of additional parking from the street and from adjacent residential properties.
6. The driveway for this property is accessed from City View Terrace, a private drive for the Collins Hill Senior Residence Development.
7. The applicant has indicated that there are no other employees involved in the business. We do note that generally landscaping/lawn care operations as home occupations have resulted in neighborhood complaints and opposition when the landscaping businesses start growing, adding more equipment, storage and employees. It should also be noted that no outdoor storage of material is allowed.
8. The regulations allow for a two square foot sign, however no signage is proposed at this time.
9. Fred Shaw, Sup’t of Pollution Control, has reviewed the proposal. He had indicated that the owner must provide for business generated waste/ recyclable collection and disposal.
10. If this application is approved, the applicant will complete a home occupation form, which contains acknowledgment that the applicant will abide by criteria contained in the zoning regulations. The applicant would also be required to return to this Commission upon expiration of the 5-year permit period. Staff request that the Commission include an approval condition that the permit is specific to the existing situation, with the single trailer. Any proposal for modifications, including additional equipment storage at this location, should return to the Commission for approval,
The Engineering Department had no comments.
No one from the public spoke in favor of or in opposition to this application.
Discussion ensued among the Commission with the following comments and concerns: Replies will be in Italics.
Clarification regarding whether there will be expansion of the business. Not planned at the present time; construction of a garage addition might occur in the future. Will agree to a PZC approval condition that limits the business size to its current size (one pickup truck, one trailer) for the 5-year approval period.
Communication with neighbors about the application. Neighbors have not expressed concern with the present business. A row of trees defines the property line – no visibility between business and neighbors.
Proximity of shed to nearby houses. The shed is located at the rear of the property.
Storage of material, i.e. salt, sand, mulch, etc. There will be no storage of any materials on the property.
Public hearing was closed at 7:58 p.m.
2. Appl. #04-74P, Corner Meadow LLC request for special exception to Article 4.1.12 and 4.3.11 and site plan of development for approval of an 18 unit senior residence development, to be known as “River Walk” on 11.91 acres located on the northwesterly corner of Sullivan Avenue and pierce Road, RR zone
Commissioner Kennedy did not sit for this application.
Barbara Barbour, applicant and part owner of the subject property, provided a brief history of the previous application. She noted that the application had been denied by PZC due to concerns regarding the driveway on Sullivan Avenue.
Peter DeMallie, Design Professionals, Inc. and representing the applicant had the following comments:
Entrance has been redesigned in response to concerns with the previous application and now will be from Pierce Road.
Site will contain 8 buildings (2-3 plexes) (6-duplexes); 18 units.
Center of the site will feature 3 duplexes with the loop street going around them.
A minimum of 35’ will be maintained between the property line and the buildings.
Distance from the northerly Morrison property line to closest unit will be approximately 69’.
Units 8, 19, 12, & 13 will feature side decks.
No access to Mitchell Fuel.
.31 acre of conveyance (from Mitchell to Corner Meadow) is shown on the submitted plans.
There is a large conservation easement placed on the property to the south of the western units.
Approval was acquired from IWA/CC. There will be no direct impact on the wetlands; there will be upland review area impact.
Site contains 12.23 acres.
Impervious coverage will amount to approximately 14.9%.
Lot coverage will amount to 7.9% (buildings).
Units will feature 2-car garages.
Criteria for special exception review have been met, i.e. acceptable traffic impacts; no effect on uses in the area; property values will not be impacted; character of the neighborhood will not be unduly disrupted; no impact to utilities; land is suitable for proposed use; good transitional use and is consistent with the Plan of Conservation & Development; proposal meets housing needs of the elderly, location is within proximity of other services; facilities have been designed to meet the need of handicapped residents/visitors; and architectural design is aesthetically pleasing;
Karen Isherwood, Engineer with Design Professionals and representing the applicant, had the following comments:
The site contains one single family vacant home with driveway.
Current condition of the site is overgrown fields.
Site drains southwesterly overland and discharges into the Podunk River, which traverses the site from north to south.
Application meets all requirements in Section 4.1.12 of the Zoning Regulations.
Minimum site frontage is approximately 466 linear feet.
A minimum of 50’ front yard and 10’ side yard is provided.
A landscape buffer of 25’ will be provided.
Minimum required setback between buildings has been provided (20’).
Required off street parking has been exceeded by providing 2 garage spaces each for 18 units.
The access drive will be approximately 24’ wide and 1000 linear feet long.
Public water and sewer will service site.
Gravity fed sewers will be provided to connect to the existing line in Strong Road; 11 of the 18 units will receive gravity flow at the upper terrace of the site; the lower 3 buildings will have individual pumps that will pump up to the gravity sewer located within the site and discharge to a new location in Pierce Road.
Storm water design will feature CB’s, collect runoff and discharge into a shallow extended detention basin. Flow will then be discharged overland to the Podunk River.
Stormwater system was designed to discharge at or below the existing peak rates of runoff.
Drainage report submitted concludes that the system designed will mitigate any potential water quality and quantity impacts from the site.
Section 4.1.12 of the Regulations requires sidewalks to be provided where necessary; sidewalks are proposed on both sides except for gaps of about 290’ to the north of the loop and 215 feet south of the entrance drive.
E & S Controls will be appropriately placed; construction entrance will be off Pierce Road.
The lower two units will have chain link fencing to protect the areas in proximity to the wetlands.
Cover sheet presented was wrong; the applicant is allowed 5 units per net buildable acreage per Item F, Section 4.1.12 of the zoning regulations. Cover will be revised. Proposed density is 4.08 units per acre.
Bruce Hillson Traffic Engineer with Traffic Engineering Solutions and representing the applicant, had the following comments to his presentation:
Traffic counts were done at the intersection of Pierce Road & Sullivan Avenue.
Study assumed completion of the site over 3 years.
Capacity analysis was done from the 2003 existing conditions through 2006 no-build conditions.
Level of service at the intersection of Pierce and Sullivan will be at C during the morning peak hour and E during the afternoon peak.
Sight distances are to intersections of Pierce & Sullivan and Pierce & Strong.
Due to no difference in traffic operations for future conditions no offsite improvements will be required.
Richard Boston, Landscape Architect, Design Professionals, Inc. and representing the applicant, presented the following information:
Signage (Exhibit A)
Streetscaping will feature London Plane trees.
The shaping of the berm on DOT property at the intersection of Sullivan & Pierce has been changed and reduced to assure sight line to the left.
Landscape screening will be placed in the rear of the buildings facing the road.
Screening and buffering in the 25’ landscape buffer will consist of evergreens, e.g., white fir and Norway Spruce; and a variety of rhododendron.
Two large existing trees on the south of the house will be saved along with the existing Norway Spruce.
Shade trees will be red maples, flowering pear, and sugar maples.
Screening between the houses will consist of evergreens and deciduous trees.
A 2’ high stone wall will separate the wetlands creation area and the area that is to be mowed behind units 16, 17, and 18.
A gazebo will be placed at the end of the path to the detention basin.
Wetland plantings in the basin will be appropriate.
Buffer adjacent to the Morrison property and the entrance drive will feature evergreen and deciduous trees, e.g., flowering crab apple, and arborvitae.
Screening to the southwest will be accomplished by planting balsam fir.
Taller evergreens and Fraser firs will be placed on the corner of the Morrison property.
Foundation plantings will be appropriate and the developer will use paver bricks.
Lighting will consist of weathered bronze colored fixtures. Average foot-candle is proposed at .37; house shields will be used wherever necessary to assure at or below .25 foot-candle at the property line.
Ed Diamond, Architect with Russell & Dawson and representing the applicant had the following comments: (Exhibit B)
Units will be vinyl sided with colonial and traditional motifs set in, e.g., gables and overhangs.
Different windows, rooflines, and trim will be featured on the units.
Walls recess in and out and the entries are recessed – this is to eliminate a flat façade.
3 units will be handicap accessible – 5 additional units will be handicap adaptable.
Attorney Ralph Alexander, representing the applicant, added the following information:
Legal format will be a common interest ownership community, i.e. bylaws and governed by an association.
A private management company will provide maintenance of the common areas.
Assessments of common charges will be placed.
Banach provided the following Planning report:
1. Request for Special Exception and site plan approval to construct an 18-unit Senior Residence Development on 12 acres located on the corner of Pierce Road and Sullivan Avenue, RR and A-20 zones. The Commission previously denied this application because of the traffic safety issues with a driveway on Sullivan Avenue very close to the signalized intersection of Pierce Road.
2. The site is bounded by Mitchell Fuel and the Town-owned Major Michael Donnelly Preserve on the north side; open land to the west and south, with a few single-family homes along Pierce Road and across Sullivan Avenue to the east. This is a very tight site, with significant environmental constraints because of the extensive quantity of wetlands.
3. All proposed units are attached units. The units would vary in size according to the new formula, with 6 units at 1400 sq ft, 7 units at 1800 sq ft., and 5 units at 1900 sq ft
4. The Special Exception criteria for review of a SRD include:
a. traffic impacts will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood;
b. there will be minimal adverse effects on existing uses in the area;
c. surrounding property values will be conserved and the character of the neighborhood will not be unduly disrupted;
d. impacts will not be detrimental to the capacity of the present and proposed utilities, street, drainage system, sidewalks, and other elements of the infrastructure;
e. the land is physically suited to the proposed use and minimal adverse environmental impacts are created;
f. the SRD proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Town Plan of Development;
g. the SRD proposal will help meet senior housing needs of South Windsor;
h. the location of the SRD facility is within reasonable proximity to community facilities or amenities which serve the needs of elderly residents, or is within reasonable proximity to indoor/outdoor activity centers, or is within close proximity to or contains permanent open space land;
i. the SRD facility has been designed to meet the needs of handicapped residents or visitors; and
j. the architectural design is aesthetically pleasing and low profile.
5. The proposed density is 3.68 units per net buildable acre; maximum 4 units per net buildable acre are allowed. One of the conditions contributing to the tightness of the site is the location of some of the buildable land. A portion of the buildable land on the western part of the site is isolated and inaccessible from the remainder of the property, yet still can be applied toward the net buildable land calculation. This results in the units being located on an area that is actually smaller than the net buildable land area and causes the project to appear denser than the density calculation indicates.
We note that units 14-18 have yards that are very close to regulated wetlands.
6. Proposed impervious coverage is 15%; 60% allowed. Required parking is 1.5 spaces per unit, or 27 spaces; the applicant has provided 36 spaces, or 2 spaces per unit, all inside garages.
7. If this application is approved, it will bring the total SRD units approved up to 223. The maximum number of units that the Commission may approve is currently capped at 250.
8. The site is right at the corner of Pierce Road and Sullivan Avenue, with the result that there is not substantial frontage along either street and access from either frontage is a concern due to proximity to the signalized intersection. The previous application tried to address this concern with a shared driveway with Mitchell Fuel, but that driveway still wasn’t far enough away from the intersection to operate safely with the existing traffic conditions on Sullivan Avenue. As a result, the driveway has been redesigned on Pierce Road as a compromise. The Town’s on-call traffic engineer, Jim Bubaris, has indicated that, if this development does
occur, a driveway on Pierce Road is preferable to a driveway on Sullivan Avenue. He also notes that the existing signal needs timing changes to optimize its operation, and the developer needs to address this. Also, the control box needs to be opened to see if there is a time clock to allow cycle length changes, and to see whether the detector on Pierce Rd is in a lock or presence mode (should be in presence mode). It may also need to have the call extension times varied because field observation indicated the call times are excessively long. Staff will ask for an approval condition to address this, in a proactive fashion, not just by notifying the State that it needs to be looked at.
Sgt. Rich Bond of the South Windsor Police Dept has reviewed this application and submitted a memo.
9. There are sidewalks shown on the inside loop and around a large section of the outside loop of the street. There are no Sullivan Avenue or Pierce Road frontage sidewalks shown.
10. There are regulated wetlands on this site (a little over half of the site is wetlands). IWA/CC approved the previous application in June with several approval modifications:
Prior to any application of fertilizers or pesticides, a management plan shall be approved by the Environmental Planner. This plan shall be included on the mylars and condominium by-laws documentation.
An annual soil test shall be performed on the site to determine the need for fertilizers in the planting year.
The applicant and/or condominium association shall provide a copy of the annual chemical application reports to the Town. The reports will also indicate when the recommendations for the turf management plan will be implemented. Accept the offer of a conservation easement based on revisions made during the June 16, 2004 meeting. Mitigation area creation and maintenance of wetland vegetation will be allowed in conservation area, the easement documents shall reflect this. We recommend a bond in the amount of.
The IWA/CC approval also includes two bonds: one for $10,000 to ensure creation of the stormwater structure and created wetlands area. The bond shall be held for three growing seasons to ensure proper establishment; and one for $15,000 to ensure compliance with the erosion and sediment control measures.
11. Public water and sewer are available to the site. WPCA approval is required for the sewer extension.
12. The applicant is showing a buffer of 25 feet. There are 38 large evergreen trees (15’ height) proposed for the buffer areas . The closest single-family residence is just south of unit #7, which will be about 90 feet away.
13. The Architecture and Design Review Board reviewed the plans on May 6. ADRC submitted a report for your consideration:
14. A hold harmless agreement and permission to enter form will need to be provided to the Town to allow the refuse & recycling vehicles to enter the site.
15. If this application is approved, in addition to items already noted, the Planning Dept. requests that the applicant verify that all units have the required 20’ separating distance.
Doolittle provided the following Engineering report:
1. Roof leaders from the backs of units 1-13 need to be tied directly into the storm drainage system so minimize the amount of surface runoff going into the small grass areas behind these units. There have been complaints from other similar developments about wet, unusable back yards.
2. The snow shelf of 3 feet is too small to hold the snow that will fall in a “normal year” and will be difficult to maintain as grass. The show shelf needs to be at least 4-5 feet wide to provide storage space for snow or the sidewalk should be widened to at least 6 feet and extended to the curb so snow can be plowed off into the road and there is no small grass strip to maintain.
3. Show a concrete leakoff from the low point in the sidewalk to CB 7 to allow water to drain from the sidewalk toward the road or show the sidewalk sloped toward the wetlands to allow the water to drain there.
4. Details regarding the sewer system need to be clarified. There’s a yard drain that I requested be moved slightly.
5. Grading plan where the access intersects the loop road needs to be clarified so that can be graded properly and drained properly.
6. There’s one place where minor grading has been suggested to be changed.
7. Sidewalks have been discussed and an arrangement was worked out where the sidewalk be extended to the north along Sullivan Avenue. That’s not included in this application however the Commission has previously asked for sidewalks along the frontage of similar developments where it would benefit the community as a whole.
8. There still appear to be conflicts between utilities, landscaping and lighting. Show the street light locations on the landscape plans and check these conflicts. Relocate items as necessary to eliminate any conflicts.
9. An application must be submitted to the WPCA for review and approval of this project.
Wentzell requested input from the public.
Marilyn Morrison, 259 Pierce Road, spoke against this application. Her concerns centered on the access driveway. buffers, traffic, density of homes proposed, and invasion of her privacy.
John Mitchell, 41 Windy Hill Drive, requested that sidewalks not be placed along Sullivan Avenue in front of his business, Mitchell Fuel Company. Large trucks pull in and out the drive and there is a potential for pedestrian conflict.
Larsen read correspondence into the record: letter from Keith Yagaloff, dated December 6, 2004; representing the concerns of Morrison (Exhibit B); letter from Lorraine Dodd, dated December 10, 2004 (Exhibit C); and letter from John J. Mitchell, Sr., dated December 11, 2004 (Exhibit D). The previous 2 letters oppose sidewalks on Sullivan Avenue.
Discussion ensued among the Commission members with the following comments and concerns: Replies will be in Italics.
Violation of zoning regulations and the proposed driveway. There is no regulation that prohibits driveways.
Space provided between units 12 & 13 – more room than between 8, 9, 10, and 11. Expansion of distance has not been accomplished within the loop road. Changes were done to the buildings, no decks between the buildings, landscaping will be provided between the buildings.
Access to Donnelly preserve from rear of the property. There will not be direct access – a walkway will not be provided. A conservation easement will be placed on the area including the upland area in the middle.
Sidewalks. Sidewalk goes to Pierce Road from the site. Sidewalks will be limited to the property. The applicant is deficient 290’ on the north area of the loop and 215’ on the entrance area. In reviewing the Regulations it was not found where sidewalks are required on both sides. Appropriate sidewalks are proposed that will meet the movement needs of the community. The applicant desires not to encroach on the Morrison property. It is approximately 400’ from the entrance drive to the parking area for Desmond’s Pond.
Banach noted that Section 4.1.12.j allows the Commission the right to request off site improvements, including sidewalks, ‘where in the judgement of the Commission off street improvements to the municipality’s infrastructure… are required in order to minimize the adverse impact of the development on the infrastructure or to insure the development will function adequately. Such improvements will be installed at the expense of the applicant.’ If the Commission is interested in sidewalks to Desmond’s Pond then it might be possible for the sidewalks to go directly across the street then place the sidewalks on the duck pond side.
Clarification of area between site and Morrison property. Unit 7 is approximately 69’ from the Morrison property line, about 90’ from the Morrison’s house.
Clarification of Morrison’s concerns: The main concern is traffic and the new SRD driveway.
Challenge to grading, i.e. driveway. No, it is not a challenge in the revised plan.
Clarification of snow shelf. 4’ will be difficult to provide because a 20’ separation distance is required between the garage and back of the sidewalk. A wider 6’ sidewalk that extends to the curb is a possibility.
Clarification of the traffic signal at Sullivan and Pierce Road. DOT will check into the detection in Pierce Road, to see if it is working properly; Coordination with the Town’s on-call traffic engineer, Jim Bubaris, will be done to review the timing of the light. Timing shall be beneficial to Sullivan Avenue because of queues and delays in peak periods. The applicant’s traffic engineer indicated that he thinks it is doubtful that the timing would be changed for Pierce Road. Pierce Road operates at a level of service B.
Lack of evidence from Morrison regarding decrease of property values, disturbance of wildlife in the wetlands, and insufficient buffer.
Distance between site and Morrison’s house. It is approximately 35’.
Clarification of the distance between backyards of units 14 & 18 and wetlands. Flagged wetlands include organic soils, habitat associated with it. Floodplain has been depicted on the plans which is guaranteed wetness – this is located a distance from the 2 units. Elevations of units will assure proper drainage to eliminate wet back yards.
Clarification of landscaping and utility conflicts. There are no utility poles – underground utilities. There are 2 placement areas for poles on the access way. The Town Engineer may be alluding to a storm drainage pipe. It will not be difficult to handle conflicts– construction coordination.
Left turn lane on Pierce Road, length of queue. A.m. peak queue length is 90’ (4 ½ cars); p.m. peak queue length is 165’ (6-7 cars) – 12-16 seconds to dissipate. Light allows 27 seconds, so all traffic on Pierce Road is cleared on each green phase.
Clarification of landscaping. The balsam fir will be planted at 6’ in height and will reach its mature height of 12-15 feet. Morrison property is 14’ higher, so at full maturity the trees will allow the Mrs. Morrison to still have her views to the area beyond the detention basin. The corner will have a plant material that will afford a greater density of landscaping and buffering. Initial evergreen screening will be a 6’ high arborvitae that will create a solid evergreen hedge.
Sight lines on entrance drive. Landscaping at the entrance drive has been placed back far enough so that it will not affect sight lines from the Morrison property.
Evidence on property values. There has been no evidence shown with other senior resident developments – research did not imply this.
Tight site, sidewalk to duck pond, use of a cross walk to be installed at intersection of Sullivan and Pierce, why are sidewalks being placed on 2 sides rather than putting one in to Donnelly Reserve. The applicant said that she would be willing to install a sidewalk to Desmond’s pond if they only have to install sidewalks on one side of the new streets.
It is desired to connect sidewalks in South Windsor.
ADRC comments. The replacement of the louvers with ridge vent has been done. ADRC also requested additional screening on the backside of the units to provide privacy. The applicant indicated that the lifestyle of people who purchase these units is not one of “encampment,” and the residents themselves are comfortable with less privacy between units.
Clarification of restriction to 55 and older. The common interest community documents restrict the age to 55 and older..
Public hearing closed at 9:30 p.m.
Kennedy returned to the meeting.
3. Appl 04-57P, DBB Management request for a zone change from RR to General Commercial for approximately 3.56 ac of land located on the northerly and southerly side of McGuire Road
Peter DeMallie, Design Professionals, Inc. and representing the applicant submitted a letter dated October 11, 2004 from Peter Churilo. (Exhibit E) He had the following comments to his presentation.
Commission denied a previous zone change application for the north side of McGuire Road, 1.35 acres.
Since that previous denial, access has been secured from McGuire Road to Route 5 via a new driveway through the existing bowling alley. The necessary cross-travel easements have been secured from Johnston McKee, owner of 10 Pin Bowl, and Ed King.
Present application is for a zone change for 1.11 acres (King) and 1.13 acres (McKee); property is located to the rear of their properties.
Applicant has met with abutters.
Each property is an existing commercial use. Area behind 10 Pin Bowl is an existing parking lot. There are 3 commercial buildings on the site of the King property; existing property line goes through the middle of a small building and a larger building.
Endorsement has been received from EDC.
If the zoning change is approved it would rectify an original error on the zoning map.
The 10 Pin Bowl is losing approximately 10 parking spaces; the owner has no problem with this.
Access to the properties will be from Route 5. The new access will reduce commercial traffic from King Street.
Banach provided the following Planning report:
1. Request for zone change from Rural Residential to General Commercial for 2.24 acres on the southern side of McGuire Road and westerly side of Route 5. The minimum lot size in the new zone is 20,000 square feet, or ½ acre. Both properties involved in the zone change have the majority of the property already zoned GC; the requested zone changes would result in the remainder of each property becoming commercially zoned. Both sites are currently in commercial use; the McKee property has the bowling alley, the King property has multi-use buildings. There have been some ZBA approvals for various uses on the King site, however there has never been a formal site
plan filed for the property.
2. The subject property is surrounded by RR land on three sides, and General Commercial property to the east. The new Town Plan generally depicts land along Route 5 as Commercial/Industrial, with Low Density Residential to the west of the Route 5 corridor; but there are no actual zone boundaries shown in the Plan.
3. The applicant recently received approval from the PZC for a private driveway to be constructed from Route 5, through the subject properties, to McGuire Road. Conditions placed on that approval included:
¨ A sign indicating, “Trucks are requested not to use this road” must be posted on the northerly side of Maguire Road at the cul de sac.
¨ Signs should be posted indicating that this is a “Private Drive”.
¨ Site plan of development is required for the any new uses of 57 Maguire Road property (including outdoor storage).
4. Section 16 includes criteria for a zone change:
¨ How the zone change compares with the Comprehensive Plan of Development;
¨ How the land shall be secured from flooding and other dangers;
¨ How the land upstream and downstream in the same watershed shall be secured from flooding and other dangers;
¨ How the land shall be served by water, sewerage, transportation, and other public utilities; and
¨ How the proposed zone change will affect any wetlands in the area.
5. General Commercial is the least restrictive of the commercial zones. If this property is rezoned to General Commercial, the uses allowed as of right include retail sales, restaurants and taverns including fast food, laundry, printing, building materials sales and storage, motor vehicle sales and storage, gas stations. Special exception uses include day care centers and adult-oriented establishments.
6. A zone change is the appropriate time to discuss traffic impacts. The small amount of existing General Commercial land on McGuire Road is currently accessed by traveling through a residential neighborhood. This is a very undesirable situation. When the zoning along Route 5 was first established, McGuire Road was a through street, and the residential neighborhood did not have to experience commercial traffic. The construction of I-291 severed the connection of McGuire Rd to Route 5.
Recognizing this, the applicant has secured an easement from the abutter for purposes of providing a direct access from Route 5 to McGuire Road. Town staff has looked at this proposed drive and Mel Stead, Sup’t of Streets, has indicated that he has a concern for snow removal with the proximity of the new drive to the existing driveway to the applicants business on McGuire Road. This is something that will need to be addressed when a site plan is submitted.
7. Secondly, Mr. Stead has an ongoing concern with the amount of outdoor vehicle storage that currently is taking place on McGuire Road by the truck body company. The applicant has been cited for zoning violations for the outdoor storage.
8. We would recommend that as a condition of the zone change, the access road must be built as well as the town’s ROW must be kept clear of commercial vehicles and storage.
9. If this zone change is approved, there will be a 50 -foot buffer requirement along the westerly property boundary. Also, there is an existing buffer requirement on the existing GC-zoned property that would have to be addressed along the McGuire Road frontage at the time that any site plans are submitted for the property at 59 McGuire Road. The buffer will have to result in the field of view between the commercial property and the residential property being obscured within five years to the extent that activity on the commercial property is not immediately apparent; and activity on the commercial site must be substantially obscured visually by the maturity of
the planting.
10. The wetlands map does not show any regulated wetlands on this site.
11. Public water is available, but there are no public sewers in this area.
12. Site plan of development approval would be required prior to any commercial use on any of these properties.
13. If this zone change is approved, the Commission must state on the record that they have found the zone change to be consistent with the plan of development.
Engineering had no report.
No one from the public spoke in favor of or against this application.
Discussion ensued among the Commission members with the following comments and concerns: Replies will be in Italics.
Buffering. It is less than 50’ on the King property due to existing buildings. Staff noted that when this type of situation occurs with an existing site, staff and the applicant work within the area available for a buffer. At some point, when an applications for site plan approval are submitted for either property, the applicant will need to fill the buffer area in with landscaping.
The outdoor storage issue has to be addressed. It is desired not to have an increase in outside storage.
Zone change is to provide the GC zone co-terminus with the rear property lines of the McKee and King properties. Yes. The only application before PZC is to move the existing GC zone line to the west to make the zone line consistent with the rear boundary line of the property. This is not DBB property that is subject to the zone change – it’s the neighboring properties.
Clarification of a zone change. If the applicant returns with an application for a zone change on the DBB property on the north side of Maguire Road, there are issues such as buffering.
Access drive and construction. That was approved by PZC as a previous application; DBB Management would construct the drive.
Clarification of Lot 5-13. It is zoned residential and currently used as a commercial use with approval from this Commission.
Public hearing was closed at 10:00 p.m.
REGULAR MEETING – MADDEN ROOM
McCann made a motion to extend the meeting beyond 10:00. Larsen seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
NEW BUSINESS:
Application 98-22P, Unity Church Order for height of light poles (Exhibit F)
Richard Boston, Design Professionals, Inc. and representing the applicant had the following comments to his presentation.
Applicant is requesting to change the height of light poles because the manufacturer has been changed – 16’ to 20’.
Isometrics revealed that there would be more complete lighting of the parking lot.
Shoebox style lights will have cut off shields to maintain the .25 foot-candles at the property line.
Discussion ensued among the Commission members with the following comments and concerns: Replies will be in Italics.
16’ poles are preferred because of the proximity to a residential neighborhood. The lower the pole the higher the wattage. Applicant’s goal is to provide softer light. Subject property is lower than the neighborhood to the north – Lakewood.
Higher poles are not desired.
What is approved? High-pressure sodium lighting, at least 250 metal halide. Same number of poles and luminaires as approved.
The trees between the properties were cut down during Church construction. The part of Lakewood involved with the proposed parking lot is higher at that point than the site.
Pacekonis made a motion to deny the change order. Larsen seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
2. Application 04-75P, Adams Lawn Service request for a 5-year major home occupation to operate a lawn service at property located at 1224 Sullivan Avenue, A-20 zone
Kennedy made a motion to approve application 04-75P, Adams Lawn Service with the following conditions:
The business must be operated by the homeowner. Only one non-resident employee can be hired.
The permit will expire on December 14, 2009, and will have to be renewed at that time.
Refuse from the business cannot be disposed of with residential refuse. Adequate arrangements must be made for business refuse disposal.
Any new building, or alteration/additions to existing buildings, requires a building permit prior to start of construction.
There is no outdoor storage of material nor disposal of material permitted on site.
This approval is for one pickup truck with one equipment trailer. No additional equipment storage is allowed without further review and approval by the Commission.
Choate seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
BONDS: Callings/Reductions/Settings
1. Site Bond: application 03-43P, Wapping Fair – release the bond in the amount of $5,000.
IWA/CC Bonds: application 03-59P, Chapel Road Subdivision – release of bond in the amount of $5,000. And application 98-60P, Cutler Ridge II – release of bond in the amount of $10,000.
Kennedy made a motion to release the above referenced bonds. Pacekonis seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
MINUTES:
The minutes of October 12, 2004, November 9, 2004, November 16, 2004, and November 23, 2004 were accepted by consensus of the Commission.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Banach informed the Commission that Quiznos had installed their sign without approval, and that she wanted input from the Commission regarding the sign appearance. Wentzell requested that Commissioners view the sign after dark to see if it is acceptable.
1. Application 04—71P, Taylor In Law Apartment
Request for a waiver of size for a recently-approved in law apartment from 896 sq. ft. to 908 sq. ft. Reason for the waiver request is for extra footage to accommodate a family heirloom sofa.
Kennedy made a motion to approve a waiver. Pacekonis seconded the motion. McCann noted that the rationale for the waiver is that the in-law apartment with a waiver still meets the 40% area requirement. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
ADJOURNMENT:
Kennedy made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:43 p.m. Pacekonis seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
Respectfully submitted
_________________________________ __________________________
Phyllis M. Mann, Recording Secretary Date Approved
| 
