MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Timothy Wentzell, Kevin McCann, Sue Larsen, Bart Pacekonis, Patrick Kennedy, Clifford Slicer, and Gary Bazzano
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Michael Sullivan sat for Bazzano during deliberations of application 05-02P, Emerald Green. Application 05-23P, Avery Street Christian Reformed Church, and application 05-22P, Brady’s Place Doggie Daycare
Louise Evans sat for Slicer during deliberations of application 05-23P, Avery Street Christian Reformed Church and application 05-22P, Brady’s Place Doggie Daycare
STAFF PRESENT: Michele R. Lipe, Assistant Director of Planning
Jeffrey Doolittle, Town Engineer
PUBLIC HEARING – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. Appl 05-02P, Emerald Green, Request for a 3 lot resubdivision of 15 acres for property located on the easterly side of Ellington Road and northerly of Quarry Brook Drive, RR and A-20 zone (continuation)
Attorney Atherton Ryan, representing the applicant had the following comments in his presentation:
o Drainage that services the 3 lot resubdivision will flow down Church Way, across Route 30, through an easement to be acquired from Podunk Ridge Condominiums and discharge directly to the Podunk River.
o There is an agreement between the applicant and the representatives from Podunk Ridge, formal agreement is being reviewed by their attorney will stipulations.
o Podunk Ridge association has indicated that they will not sign an agreement until there is an approval from this Commission and approval for the drainage system. Another stipulation calls for the drainage system (the easement area that crosses Podunk Ridge) be owned and maintained by the Town of South Windsor.
o Regarding the Clark’s and the shallow well that exists on their property, an agreement has been worked out and signed by both parties, Unity Church has also agreed with the arrangement proposed.
o If Teaberry Senior Residence Development is not approved Church Way will not be built. Teaberry hearing will have to be continued because there is no IWA/CC approval at this time.
Karen Isherwood, Engineer and representing the applicant had the following comments in her presentation:
o Revisions submitted to the Town include modifying the sanitary sewer extension within Ellington Road to provide the adequate slopes for cleansing velocities; detention basin has been eliminated, drainage has been accommodated in the front basin; pipe slopes have been revised; and detention basin outlets have been modified; increased the elevation of the basin by ½ foot to accommodate the additional flow; and increased the size of the pipes discharging from the basin.
o Revisions have been made according to Staff’s comments.
o Final plans will show the under drains in and around the cul-de-sac.
Doolittle had the following Engineering comments:
1. Plans have been modified to the Town’s satisfaction. There are some details that need to be worked out and clarified with Design Professionals.
2. There must be assurance that the drainage report is complete.
3. The dirt farm road is on lot 1 and 2 and it is not shown on the submitted plans that the road has been addressed. If there is a potential problem there it should be addressed, i.e. graded or planted.
Wentzell requested input from the public.
Tim Friend, 887 Ellington Road, spoke in favor of this application.
Patrick Grossi, representing Unity Church, spoke in favor of the application. He stated that Unity Church will sign the agreement for the water hookup to the Clark residence at 909 Ellington Road.
Eric Clark, 909 Ellington Road, stated his concerns centered on a fence being placed on his property bordering the detention basin. The fence is desired for privacy as well as safety.
Al Platteis, 71 Quarry Brook Drive, spoke in favor of this application. His concern was the tractor run along the south border of his property and the development. This channels ground water coming off the cornfield and he would like any drainage directed away from his property.
Peter DeMallie, Design Professionals, noted that Unity Church, per PZC’s approval in 1998, is required to erect a 6’ stockade fence along the common property lines on 2 sides of the Clark property. The fence will be extended along the back property of the detention basin on the left of Church Way. In respect to sidewalks, the applicant is proposing 850 linear feet of off-site sidewalks in lieu of sidewalks internally. Regarding the existing dirt road, it came up during a prior hearing when the abutter indicated he did not want the applicant to disturb the existing condition. It was indicated that the applicant would not be touching that area. All the proposed improvements are beyond that area and they drain towards the detention basin. If there is an erosion problem on the property then
the applicant should address it. Otherwise the area will be left alone.
Discussion ensued among the Commission members with the following comments and concerns: Replies will be in Italics.
· Clarification of the Town maintaining the drainage easement. The Town Engineer replied that most of the drainage is coming off a proposed Town road; the Town would not be averse to maintaining the drainage easement. It’s not uncommon.
· Clarification of conditions relating to an approval. Approval conditions can be appropriate for the hookup of water and the execution of the drainage easement with Podunk Ridge.
· Clarification of the fence. The fence is shown on the landscaping plan for Teaberry Estates Senior Residence Development.
· Applicant addressing the existing tractor run. It is addressed in the drainage report and it’s not ground water, it is surface run off.
· Why Emerald Green separate from Teaberry Estates. Required frontage is needed for Teaberry Estates. The applicant is before Town Council for an easement to discharge the rear basin. Approval for Emerald Green would provide a remedy for the situation and allow a clearer direction (which ultimately would eliminate the need for this easement on Town land). Resolution is needed for Emerald Green in order to have resolution of what will be done with the drainage. Emerald Green has wetlands approval, Teaberry Estates SRD is awaiting decision by IWA/CC.
· It is desired to see the easement as part of this application before there is a decision. Approval is desired, if the easement is denied the plan is void. There is an agreement for an easement, however before Podunk Ridge is willing to sign the easement, they want to be assured of approval from PZC and Town Council.
· There shall be no construction of any kind on the applicant’s land until the easement is in place. The applicant has no problems with ‘no construction until an easement is in place’.
· Clarification of the detention basin. What is before PZC is a design that accommodates full development as shown for both applications. If Emerald Green is approved and the applicant has to return for the third lot, the site will be over designed. The proposed development would not be larger resulting in a change order and design calculations.
· Clarification of drainage easements and is this the case in all circumstances? It’s different in form, not in function. When a subdivision is approved, certain aspects of the drainage are maintained by the Town and easements are sought routinely.
Wentzell closed the public hearing at 8:20 p.m.
2. Appl 05-03P, Teaberry Estates, Special Exception to Article 4.1.12 and Site plan of development to create a 25 unit Senior Residence Development on property located on the easterly side of Ellington Road and northerly side of Quarry Brook Drive, RR zone (continuation)
Attorney Atherton Ryan, representing the applicant had the following comments in his presentation:
§ Changes in the drainage design have occurred as a result of both the applicant’s engineer further study and the input from Town Staff, i.e. elimination of the detention basin from the east end of the property and drainage being directed toward the main basin.
§ A letter of certification for the SRD proposal was submitted for the record. (Exhibit A) The declaration is the document which creates the common interest community which cannot be changed by action of the homeowners.
Peter DeMallie, representing the applicant had the following comments in his presentation:
§ The applicant has met with multiple neighbors for extensive periods. All outstanding issues have been addressed to their satisfaction.
§ The drainage will not go through the property of the Unity Church; drainage will flow down to the Podunk River across Ellington Road.
§ The offsetting of units to allow side loading garages has been accomplished.
§ The Plan of Conservation and Development was adopted in 2002-2003 by PZC. It contains a narrative relative to balanced growth in a residential area. The proposed development represents a balanced growth because it is net generator, e.g. no children in the school system, no public street other than Church Way leading up to the proposed development, a community center is proposed (maintained by the homeowners), this is a linear site, units have been offset, and a planted island cul-de-sac maintained by the homeowners.
§ The land use area of the PCD indicates this area for residential use and this proposal is consistent with the general goals and objectives of the PCD amendment.
Karen Isherwood, Engineer and representing the applicant had the following comments in her presentation:
§ Elimination of the detention basin in the easterly portion of the site has occurred.
§ The structures in the roadway are slightly deeper to accommodate the paved surfaces.
§ Runoff from the paved surfaces will continue westerly to the original basin to be located just north of Church Way.
§ It is proposed to have an addition of mulched paths in the area to be kept open to the meadow and eventually to open space.
§ The landscape buffer will be located in the appropriate buffer area and protected.
§ A cross walk will be located in front of units 1 & 2 extending to unit 25.
§ 7 curb cuts from cul-de-sac have been allowed in other developments, e.g. Lakewood.
§ There is more than enough area for snow storage.
§ Grading for the driveways does not exceed 5%.
§ Area between sidewalks and garages will be appropriate and accommodation to the 20’ will be upheld.
Lipe provided the Planning report:
1. Sun rooms on units were researched resulting in the finding of PZC allowing sun rooms on DRZ’s and Senior Residence Development to be allowed as a three-season room. The most recent plans that reflect that are the Summerwood Plan which showed sunrooms on them as well as the Eagle Run plan. There has been past plans approved with sunrooms not counting towards the square footage of the unit. When building permits are signed off for a sunsroom, e.g. Collins Crossing, it is known that it’s on the plan as a 3-season room and is not to be heated and this is verified through the building permit process and inspections.
Doolittle provided the following Engineering comments.
1. Many of his comments have been addressed.
2. Side loaded garages are being presented and they will meet the 20’ separation distance between the garage and the sidewalk. However the offsetting of units resulted in several units being close to the sidewalk (6-7’). Many of the units are 12-15’ from the sidewalk.
3. A swale or drainage trench has been requested for the area around the cul-de-sac at the bottom of the hill, known as Church Way to catch runoff from this site. The applicant agreed to this request given the ground water situation.
4. There is a concern about 7 driveways on the cul-de-sac. Public Improvement Specs limit developing no more than 3 driveways on a cul-de-sac. This spec was developed after Lakewood was built and many other subdivisions were built because of difficulty of removing snow and complaints about snow being in driveways or damaging mailboxes, utilities, or other things. The Town decided to limit the amount of driveways on cul-de-sacs which benefits the residents as well.
5. Many SRD’s have been approved recently with 3 driveways in the cul-de-sac or a close number to that. Podunk Ridge has 4 driveways in the cul-de-sac. Residents reported to the Town that they were concerned about the large pile of snow that was left in the cul-de-sac with 4 driveways in the cul-de-sac. Summerwood and Eagle Run were similarly approved with not as many driveways; Summerwood has shared driveways but certainly not as many as 7 driveways in the cul-de-sac.
6. There should be caution that with any SRD, the landscape plan has been modified as much as possible to mitigate the conflicts between utilities, landscaping, lighting, and the developer should be careful with this in building the unit so that there are not conflicts between landscaping, lighting, and utilities.
7. I am completing the review of the drainage report and WPCA review and approval is required for this application.
Wentzell requested input from the public.
Tim Friend, 587 Ellington Road, spoke in favor of the application.
Jean Marc Jacques, JMJ Construction spoke in favor of the application.
Pat Grossi, representing Unity Church spoke in favor of the application.
Mark Charboneau, 89 Quarry Brook Drive, had concerns with the buffer zone abutting his property because it is a wet area and drainage issues. He exhibited photos of leaning trees. His concerns also were standing water in the detention areas, concerns that the Association will not properly maintain the property, and he requested that the Town extend their bonds on this property to assure proper maintenance.
Discussion ensued among the Commission members with the following comments and concerns: Replies will be in Italics.
· Clarification of the density ratio. 2.3 units per net buildable acreage. The regulations allow up to 3 when it’s a single family detached.
· Intent of the Town is to provide housing to seniors that are reasonably priced. High $200,000. to low $300,000. per unit similar to Podunk Ridge across the street.
· Willingness of the applicant to have the same conditions that would be considered for Emerald Estates – be applied to Teaberry Estates. There is no objection on the part of the applicant.
· Clarification of sunrooms and the addition of square footage to the units. It is not desired for sunrooms to be put over the patios as an option. 2,000 square feet is the limit and it is not desired to have larger units push the limit with the addition of sun rooms.
· Clarification of the drainage for the units around the cul-de-sac. The site was walked by the Isherwood, Doolittle, Folger, and Pollock. It was determined that the detention basin be eliminated in that area and to consider infiltrators there for surface runoff and/or have an overflow tie into the detention basin. Groundwater is approximately 2-3’ below the surface. The applicant chose to lower the system in the roadway by another 1 ¼ feet and pick up the drainage for treatment. Foundation drains will be received at one location, bring it down farther, continue to feed the wetlands and not starve it downhill. This is a
delicate balance to have with the wetlands.. Wetlands Commission received this favorably and did not express any concerns.
· Clarification of what is draining into the wetlands. Pipe drainage will be received and runoff from a reduced surface of lawn area. Foundation drains will be draining onto the surface into the wetlands area, 12” pipe then daylighting just prior to the wetlands in the meadow
· Volume of water from the foundation drains. When the area was farmed and the surface water was greater there was some scarring – it has disappeared since farming was halted. Most of the erosion in that area was from to groundwater, confirmed by John Ianni’s report; there is a clay layer. The foundation drains are being relocated from one area, bringing it to the surface which will again infiltrate into the wetlands, and continue on as ground water as it does today. Volume will be no greater than what exists and Wetlands Commission wanted assurance that the wetlands wouldn’t be starved.
Doolittle noted that this would not be an issue because if the wetlands cannot assimilate the groundwater it will disperse over the surface and it will spill out and run down the slope but it will be disbursed over the surface; similar to a level spreader and probably better than a level spreader. Jeff Folger, Ed Pollock and Doolittle agreed that this was the best solution to minimize the amount of runoff that goes down the slope. The intent is to take some runoff away, not adding runoff to the slope. Runoff from the developed area will be routed to the wetlands.
· Clarification of age restriction and definition of permanent. A definition of permanent was not included in the Declaration. Contemplation is that a 21 year old, college student/working adult could live with his parents on a permanent basis as long as one of the parents was older and in residence.
Lipe noted that bonds of permanent maintenance are non-existent. What has been done in some situations where there is a concern of landscaping the landscaping bond is held longer. A typical procedure for releasing the landscaping bond is after a planting season has gone by and the plantings have survived, then the bond is released. Bonds for some subdivisions have been held for a five year period to ensure survival of the plantings. Relative to the drainage situation the applicant will have to submit an operation and maintenance plan as part of the drainage system.
Some of the bonds that the Town takes, on a private development similar to this, at the time that they want to move into a unit and the project had not been completed as far as pavement, curbing, etc., the town will bond remaining site work that must be completed. The Town bonds those kinds of improvements for assurance that they will be completed. When the work is finished then the bond is released.
· Combination of the driveways on the cul-de-sac. The cul-de-sac is a longer length and there is a larger island plus considerable area on each side. Shared driveways are not marketable.
Doolittle noted that requirements for driveways and cul-de-sacs do not take into the account the size of the cul-de-sac. Mannarino Builders have built 2 cul-de-sacs – (public road) which are larger than the one proposed and have 3 driveways off them. Regulations state that the design requirement for SRD generally conforms to Town Standards.
· Stability of soil and leaning trees including falling trees. There are fallen trees that have died and limbs broken off at 6-8’ heights, few at ground level; typically not up rooted.
· Landscaping of cul-de-sac is void. The cul-de-sac includes a grassed berm to minimize car lights as they travel around the circle; an evergreen could be planted in the center.
· The majority of the back of the houses on Quarry Brook contain oak and ash trees, some are 40’-50’ high. They are leaning seeking the sunlight. If any of the trees interfere with the construction the branches will be removed. It is the intent of the applicant to maintain large trees in the areas within the 30’ buffer which is required by zoning. Evergreens and evergreen shrubs (rhododendron) will be used to supplement the landscape buffer. Slopes from the Quarry Brook residences drop down to their property lines (3’-6’). Moisture on the slopes is caused by many years of piling leaves in that area. Development area will be
lower than the rear yards. Soils in that area are sandy, silty soil and there is no awareness of a stabilization problem. The areas behind the houses contain many leaf piles
· Fence to be installed by the Clark’s residence as a contingency of Emerald Green Resubdivision. Yes.
· Clarification of buffer.
Lipe replied that with the latest revision sufficient landscaping has been added to the buffer areas. Removal of debris and such will have to be removed before the planting is accomplished. Staff is comfortable with what has been shown by the applicant.
· Clarification of driveways on cul-de-sac. Plan can be altered. It should be noted the original plan showed front load garages –this was not desired by the Commission. The plans were modified to put in as many side load garages that could be done and to keep a few shared driveways. The submitted plans exhibit four designs staggered, which breaks up the linear roadway, and provide some courtyards.
· Clarification of placement of sidewalk and its extension. Proposed offsite sidewalk will begin at Church Way and terminates at the crosswalk/entrance drive to Mill On The River Restaurant on the east side. There will be no sidewalk reductions on the north side of Church Way; sidewalk will be terminated at the last parking space for the community building. Sidewalks will go from all units to the community building.
Paul Otterway, 26 Pintail, stated that Lakewood would be opposed to the sidewalks located on the east side of Ellington Road because of the cost of maintaining the sidewalk and additional liability for Lakewood. Excess parking by restaurant patrons is not desired in Lakewood.
Pat Grossi, Unity Church, would be opposed to sidewalks because of the maintenance and concern of restaurant patrons using the parking spaces and liability thereof.
Tim Friend, 887 Ellington Road, spoke in favor of the sidewalks, he stated that particular stretch of Ellington Road is dangerous and traffic is greater every day.
Rachelle Clark, 909 Ellington Road, was neutral regarding the sidewalks in front of their house.
Kennedy made a motion to extend the public hearing for application 05-03P, Teaberry Estates to May 10, 2005. McCann seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
REGULAR MEETING – MADDEN ROOM
NEW BUSINESS:
Discussion/Decision/Action regarding the following:
1. Highland Park Market at Evergreen Walk review of building elevations (Exhibit B can be found in the Planning file Appl 03-28P, Evergreen Walk)
New elevations were submitted along with samples of materials that will be used on the proposed building. Presentation included the following comments:
Ø Columns shown are not conical; they are straight columns (due to computer generation).
Ø Main focus of the building is the cast stone and efis panels along with selected three colored bricks. Also a solid copper roof will be featured on the building.
Ø Entry way to the store will be open up to the copper roof.
Ø Another retail section will be attached to with this building but it is not known what as yet.
Ø Skylights will be incorporated to allow natural light throughout the store.
Ø Intent is to keep the condensers off the edge of the building.
Ø There will be one loading door, a self contained compactor; the power company also has an existing transformer in this area – that will also be screened.
Discussion ensued among the Commission members with the following comments and concerns. Replies will be in Italics.
· Screening on the roof resembles another building on the stop because of similar coloring, there are no details, finish etc. Screening is textured, very linear to cover large piece of equipment. They could be softened. Intent was to blend the color and make them disappear. It is desired to break up the massive solid façade. Landscaping was approved as part of Evergreen Walk’s approval. There is an approved landscaping plan that goes with this building as it was approved originally – footprint has not changed.
· Old Navy building features gazeboes to hide mechanicals; it is desired to have depth and texture.
Kennedy made a motion to extend the meeting beyond 10:00 p.m. Larsen seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
· Concept for the screening of the roof top mechanicals is not to draw attention away from the curved copper roof and the skylights.
· Sign fits well, quality of material is acceptable, simulates natural stone.
There was a consensus of agreement from the Commission for what was presented.
Appl 05-02P, Emerald Green, request for 3 lot resubdivision of 15 acres for property located on the easterly side of Ellington Road and northerly of Quarry Brook Drive, RR and A-20 zone
Sullivan sat for Bazzano during deliberations regarding application 05-02P, Emerald Green. Bazzano was not present during the public hearing of this application.
Discussion ensued among the Commission members with the following comments and concerns. Replies will be in Italics.
· Approving three lots only.
· Clarks’ water agreement has not been signed but representatives from Unity Church stated that it would be signed.
· Agreement for the drainage from the entire site over to Podunk Ridge is a serious concern but this issue can be included as a condition, i.e. no construction on the site until an agreement has been signed.
Kennedy made a motion to approve with modifications application 05-02P, Emerald Green with the following conditions:
1. This approval is for three lots, numbered 1-3.
2. Concrete sidewalks built to Town’s specifications shall be installed on the north side of the new street.
3. Drainage and construction for this subdivision is subject to approval by the Town Engineer.
4. All lots shall be serviced by the Town of South Windsor Sanitary Sewage System subject to approval by WPCA.
5. Street lighting shall be installed on streets, intersections, and cul-de-sacs in accordance with the policy established by the Chief of Police. Street lighting is to be coordinated through the police, copy enclosed.
6. Street names and locations of fire hydrants are subject to approval of the Fire Marshal for the Town of South Windsor. Street names and supporting posts shall be installed by the developer in conformance with the Standards of South Windsor at no expense to the Town.
7. A liability insurance policy shall be submitted to the Town of South Windsor to insure with the combined policy for bodily injury and/or property damage in the amount of $1,000,000.
8. If this application is subject to the Commission’s approval of the Inland Wetland’s Agency/Conservation Commission including a bond in the amount of $25,000. to insure successful installation of the storm drainage pipe.
9. Trees within the street trees easement or any other trees that is currently on land that is currently or will be in the future becomes Town owned land are to be planted in accordance with the enclosed street planting specifications. The enclosed specifications must be included in the approved plans.
10. Before commencing of site work a meeting must be held with Town Staff.
11. All plans used in the field by the developer must bear the stamp and authorized signature of the Town of South Windsor.
12. All easements for conservation purposes, drainage easements may be required connection with the approval of the subdivision must be submitted on standard Town Easement Form. Where appropriate to this Commission prior to filing of mylars and the issuance of building permits. All deeds for open space and public improvements must be submitted prior to request for Town acceptance. All deeds must be in accordance with policy for accepting deeds and must be approved by the Engineering Department and Town Attorney.
13. Footing drains are required for each house. Prior to building the structure on the lot the topographic map drawn to a scale of 1” = 40’ should be submitted. For each lot in the subdivision showing proposed contours, elevations, and locations of footing drains. No building permit shall be issued until the proposed contours, floor elevations, and locations of footing drains have been approved by the Town Engineer.
14. For any reason finish grading and other individual site work is not completed the Town Engineer shall determine the amount of the cash bond to insure final grading and site work. This cash bond must be submitted prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy.
15. Quantity estimates must be submitted to the Town Engineer on the enclosed form for the purpose of determining subdivision bonding. All bonds shall conform to the enclosed bond policy and shall be posted prior to the filing of the final plans in the Town Clerk’s office. If the developer chooses to submit a letter of credit for a one year term said letter of credit must be renewed on a yearly basis until completion of the development. If a new letter of credit has not been received within 30 days before the expiration date the Commission may at its option call the letter its holding.
16. Drainage assessment fee in the amount of $150.00 shall be submitted to this Commission.
17. The Town Engineer’s review comments dated 3/16/05 and 3/17/05 must be addressed to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer.
18. No building permits will be issued until all modifications have been complied with and final plans have been filed in the Town Clerk’s office.
19. The signed agreement between JMJ, the Clarks, and Unity Church to hook up the property at 909 Ellington Road to public water must be submitted prior to any construction.
20. The signed drainage agreement between the Podunk Ridge Condominium Association and JMJ Construction must be submitted prior to commencing of any work on the site.
21. A fence must be provided along the westerly side of the detention area.
McCann seconded the motion.
Larsen made a motion to amend the original motion by adding the construction of a sidewalk from the entrance to Emerald Green north to the Mill On The River Restaurant shall be done. Pacekonis seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was 6-1 with Wentzell, Larsen, McCann, Pacekonis, Slicer, and Sullivan voting for the motion. Kennedy voted against the motion.
The original motion as amended was called. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
4. Appl 05-23P, Avery Street Christian Reformed Church, request for special exception to section 4.1.8.b and site plan of development for the construction of an 11,700 sf church on property located at 399 Beelzebub Road, RR zone
Sullivan sat for Bazzano and Evans sat for Slicer. Bazzano and Slicer were not present for the public hearing of this application.
Discussion ensued among the Commission members with the following comments and concerns: Replies will be in Italics.
· Agreed to one way in and one way out.
· There is no problem with traffic in this area.
McCann made a motion to approve application 05-23P Avery Street Christian Reformed Church with the following conditions:
1. Prior to installation of sidewalks a meeting must be held with Town Staff.
2. No building permit will be issued until the final mylars have been filed in the Town Clerk’s office.
3. This application is subject to the Commission’s approval of the Inland Wetland Agency/Conservation Commission including a bond in the amount of $5,000 for Erosion and Sediment Control and a bond in the amount of $5,000 for installation of storm water trenches.
4. The as-built plan is required prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy per Section 8.1.11 of the Zoning Regulations.
5. Footing drains are required.
6. A landscape bond in the amount of $1,000 is required and must be submitted prior to the filing of mylars.
7. All plans used in the field by the developer must bear the stamp of signature of the Town of South Windsor.
8. This approval does not constitute an approval of the sanitary sewer. Approval has to be acquired from WPCA.
9. Building street number must be included on the final plan.
10. Pavement markings must be maintained in good condition throughout the site drives and parking areas.
11. The Town Engineer’s review comments dated April 5, 2005 must be addressed to the Town Engineer’s satisfaction.
12. A key map must be provided in accordance with site plan application requirement.
13. The dumpster pad must be concrete as shown.
14. Site lighting levels must conform to Section 17 of the Zoning Regulations.
15. A waiver of 3 parking spaces is allowed.
Larsen seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
5. Appl 05-22P, Brady’s Place Doggie Daycare, request for special exception to section 6.1.3.6 to operate a “doggie daycare” on property located at 357 Pleasant Valley Road, I zone
Evans sat for Slicer and Sullivan sat for Bazzano. Pacekonis did not vote on this application.
Discussion ensued among the Commission members with the following comments and concerns:
· This use would not be placed in a residential zone.
· There is sympathy for the people who live in that area.
· Truck traffic is there but a well trained dog doesn’t pay attention to it.
Kennedy made a motion to approve application 05-22P, Brady’s Place Doggie Daycare with the following conditions:
1. The business shall provide for more frequent pick ups of dog waste if the Town Sanitarian determines that it’s necessary.
2. The fence shall be 10’ high.
3. The Special Exception will be on file.
Larsen seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
6. Change Order for Wentworth Park
Lipe provided a brief history of this site. The applicant was requesting to be allowed to offer for sale units that were 1,300 sf (instead of 2,600 sf as approved). The Commission requested him to go back to the Traffic Engineer for another analysis to assure no additional traffic impact resulting in no change in the trip generation.
Doolittle said that his only concern is that it may affect water pollution control approval. The approval was for one lateral per unit, now if they are split from top and bottom that has to be accounted for in the building for WPCA. It is suggested that WPCA have an opportunity to review this change order.
Discussion ensued among the Commission members with the following comments and concerns:
· Parking spaces? Parking will not change – based on gross floor area.
Kennedy made a motion to approve the change order as presented subject to WPCA approval. Slicer seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
Bonds:
1. Application 03-28P, Shops at Evergreen Walk/Buckland Road widening: Present amount is $664,727.00, reduction of $447,727.00*, leaving a balance of $217,000.00
* - Reallocating $200,000.00 to rooftop screening; $33,000 to miscellaneous site work.
Kennedy made a motion to approve the recommended reduction of the above referenced bond. Larsen seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
2. Application 03-35P, Gateway Trunk Sewer Line: Present amount is $658,344.00; reduction of $495,761.00 leaving a balance of $162,583.00
Kennedy made a motion to approve the recommended reduction of the above referenced bond. McCann seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
ADJOURNMENT:
Kennedy made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:50 p.m. Pacekonis seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
Respectfully Submitted
Phyllis M. Mann, Recording Secretary
| 
