MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Patrick Kennedy, Clifford Slicer, Gary Bazzano, Michael Sullivan, Suzanne Choate, Bart Pacekonis
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Dan Jeski (sat for Choate), David Sorenson (sat for Evans)
STAFF PRESENT: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning; Jeff Doolittle, Town Engineer
PUBLIC HEARING – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Bazzano read the PZC legal notice as it was published in the Journal Inquirer on Thursday, March 16 and Thursday, March 23, 2006.
1. Appl 05-77P, J.E. Shepard Company– request for a 2 year temporary and conditional permit to allow a two-family house on property located at 2019 John Fitch Boulevard, I zone
The application was continued until a later date.
2. Appl. 06-07P, Seth Walter, request garage addition for Silverleaf Woodworking, LLC, major home occupation for building custom furniture and interior woodwork at 63 Beechwood Lane, A-20 zone
Seth Walter, 63 Beechwood Lane presented the application:
Business has been operating as a minor home occupation for the past three years. Building a garage would allow the machinery to be moved from the basement to the garage.
Banach, Director of Planning, gave the following planning report:
This is an application for a 5 year major home occupation permit for a woodworking business known as “Silverleaf Woodworking,” to be conducted from a workshop in the garage, for property located at 63 Beechwood Lane, A-20 zone. The applicant currently has had a minor home occupation for 3-years for this use (operated from his basement) and is now requesting to expand this business into a shop area and part of the garage. The applicant has indicated that his work includes building custom furniture and interior woodwork, and that finishing work is done at another location.
The applicant is proposing an addition to his two car garage which would include another garage bay as well as a shop to the rear, for a total of 658 sf. A building permit has been issued for this construction based on a letter from the applicant stating he understands that the area can only be used for residential uses and cannot be used for a business without an approval from this commission.
The applicant’s narrative indicates that he has no employees, and no retail sales, and no formal hours of operation. His business is generated via phone or email, and he typically visits the homes of his clients to discuss the work.
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.
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 retain 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 can not 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.
The applicant appears to meet the physical criteria for the home occupation. The area to be dedicated to the occupation is less than 25% of the total area of the dwelling. There is no need for additional parking since there will not be any customers visiting the site.
The applicant is allowed a two square foot sign, however is not proposing a sign with this application.
The existing house is served by public sewer and water. The applicant will need to address how refuse collection of wastes will occur. The applicant has been advised that business refuse cannot be included in residential trash collection. The applicant should also address noise that may be generated from this business. (The commission may want to put limitations on the hours of operation.)
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 for renewal upon expiration of the 5-year permit period.
There were no comments from the public.
Discussion ensued among the commission. Responses will be in italics.
Bazzano confirmed with Banach that setbacks meet all zoning requirements.
Sullivan asked about hours of operation. Hours tend to vary and go no later than 9:00 p.m. There have not been any complaints.
The public hearing closed at 7:40p.m.
3. Appl. 06-01P, Evergreen Walk Office South – Site Development Plan application (Section 5.8.7.1) to construct a medical office building, parking, storm water structures, and associated improvements on 5+/- acres located approximately 270 feet westerly of Buckland Road, and approximately 310 feet southerly of Deming Street, Gateway Development zone
Choate arrived at the meeting.
Frank Hubeny, Senior Planner for FLB Architecture & Planning, presented the application:
The application has been presented to IWA/CC and the public hearing is still open. The Architecture & Design Review Commission has reviewed the application.
This site plan application is for a three story, 60,000 square foot medical office building with 285 parking spaces. The lot sits 400 feet south of Deming Street and 400 feet to the west of Buckland Road. The project is part of a planned unit development. This unit will be number 11.
Access to the site will be mainly from Deming Street. The main entrance of the building will be on the east side. There will be a connection from the existing LA Fitness side through Cedar Avenue to the north.
Parking is located around the building, with rows on the east and west side running in a north/south direction.
Dan Delaney, civil engineer with Fuss and O’Neill presented the utilities:
The sewer line servicing the site will be pumped up to an existing man hole behind LA Fitness. The water line will come up Deming Street. Telephone, gas and electric will be extended from the south into the site behind LA Fitness. Storm water will be collected by catch basins and discharged into a storm water detention basin located to the west. It is sized to take stormwater from future development.
Rain gardens will be incorporated into the islands.
Lighting shown on the site plan does not show all lighting proposed. Lights on Tamarack Avenue will actually extend down further into the site.
Frank Hubeny discussed the plans for a continuation of the Tamarack Ave boulevard.
Phil Voyer, Project Architect with FLB Architecture and Planning presented the architecture plans:
The building is approximately 20,000 square feet per floor and is a 14 foot height from floor to floor. The building will have a centralized elevator lobby. Entrances are on all four sides. Elevations on all sides of the building are about the same.
The exterior of the building is precast concrete panels. (Examples were shown.) Colors and tones selected reflect the surrounding earth materials of the Buckland Hills area. Rooftop mechanical units will be screened.
Rosemary Aldridge, Landscape Architect presented the planting plan:
Flowering pears, ornamental grasses and ground cover will be on the medians. Off the west end and toward the wetlands, native plantings will be used. Going in towards the site, ornamental trees will be at the driveway entrances. Along the first row of parking will be dwarf winterberry shrubs. Within the site there will be several types of shade trees. Foundation plantings will be around the base of the building and at the entrance ways.
The goal was to create a succession of blooms throughout the seasons.
Banach, Director of Planning, presented a planning report:
1. Request for site plan approval to construct a 3-story, 60,000 sq ft office building just south of the new ECHN office building, south of Deming Street and west of Buckland Road, Gateway zone. Maximum impervious coverage allowed is 60%. In the Gateway zone, the entire project is treated as one lot for development purposes, so the cumulative impervious coverage on the entire 232-acre site will be 21.4% including all development to date plus this application. Proposed building height is 44 feet; 60 feet allowed. Lot size is 5 acres; minimum lot size allowed is 3 acres. Since the entire Evergreen Walk site is a consolidated lot, individual yard setbacks do not
apply except around the perimeter of the site; however, the applicant has chosen to maintain all of the Gateway Zone yard setbacks for this application.
2. This site will be accessed solely from Evergreen Walk’s internal road network, with a southern extension of Tamarack Avenue and an interconnection via Evergreen Way with LA Fitness to the southeast. The key map on page GI.0.2 shows the centerline of the Tamarack Avenue extending to the existing loop roadway on the western edge of the parking lots for the Shops at Evergreen Walk. At the present time, that existing loop roadway is not a boulevard, so it seems appropriate that it will at some point need to be reconstructed so that the entire length of Tamarack Avenue is a boulevard.
3. State Traffic Commission approval has been granted for the entire development as shown on the General Plan, including 650,000 square feet of office buildings.
4. The General Plan shows office buildings occupying the entire area bounded by Tamarack Avenue, Deming Street, Buckland Road and Cedar Avenue, so this office building conforms with the master plan in that respect. Over time, as the actual buildings are designed and located, the concept locations shown on the master plan are being replaced with the realities of individual client requirements. The parking configuration is different from the General Plan but conforms with the desired Gateway Zone parking objective of distributing the parking around the building rather than having the all of the parking located between Buckland Road and the building.
5. Sidewalks are shown to be extended along Tamarack Avenue and along the northern side of the Evergreen Way extension, up to LA Fitness’ driveway. There is a gap in the Evergreen Way sidewalk between LA Fitness’ 2 driveways and then the sidewalk picks up again on Evergreen Way. The gap needs to be filled in so that there is a continuous sidewalk from Deming Street throughout the street network.
6. The parking requirement for medical office buildings is one space per 200 square feet of gross floor area or 4 spaces per treatment room plus one space per employee, whichever is larger. At this time the plan reflects one space per 200 square feet, with some additional reserve parking. We anticipate that over time, as more and more commercial buildings are erected, shared parking will become a bigger factor and parking should not be an issue.
7. Lighting pole height is 25 feet. Luminaires are full cutoff fixtures. There is no visible rooftop mechanical equipment. Architectural and Design Review Committee reviewed this plan on February 16 and was satisfied with the design.
8. The parking lot landscaping requirement for the Gateway zone is 10% for this site. Landscaped areas totaling 15% have been provided.
9. A free-standing sign is proposed at the site entrance on Tamarack Drive. A preliminary sign design has been provided.
10. There are regulated wetlands on site. IWA/CC was originally scheduled to hear this application on March 15, but the meeting was cancelled due to lack of a quorum of IWA/CC members. The IWA/CC hearing has been rescheduled to April 5. This PZC hearing will need to remain open for the wetlands commission’s report, unfortunately due to circumstances beyond the applicant’s control.
11. The box culvert on Tamarack Avenue that crosses the wetlands between ECHN and this new building shows a parapet wall that appears to be plain concrete on the inside facing the roadway. We learned with the Shops at Evergreen Walk that we need to face those inside parapet walls with a decorative facing, not leave them as plain concrete. Staff would like to see a decorative facing added to the plans, with a detail provided before the public hearing continuation.
12. Public water is available in Tamarack Avenue. Sewer will be extended along Evergreen Way. Water Pollution Control Authority approval is required.
13. There is a dumpster on the north side of the parking lot, on a concrete pad with screening.
14. There was no notification to other towns required as this application is not within 500 feet of a town boundary.
15. If this site plan is approved, the Planning Dept. requests the following modifications:
Provide a light fixture detail that specifies full cutoff fixtures.
Add street lighting along the Tamarack Drive extension, and a streetlight at the sharp corner on Evergreen Way extension between LA Fitness and the new site.
Close the sidewalk gap along the back of LA Fitness.
Add decorative facing to the inside of the box culvert parapet walls.
Jeff Doolittle, Town Engineer gave an engineering report:
1. Are all 4 stop signs necessary at the intersection of Tamarack Ave and Evergreen Way and at the sharp corner on Evergreen Way? The plans show a stop bar at both ends (N&S) of the front drive along the west side of the building but no stop signs. Add a stop sign at these two locations.
2. This plan includes connecting Evergreen Way with Tamarack Drive. However, Evergreen Way does not seem to be suitable for a connector road from ECHN to the Shops at Evergreen Walk as it is narrow and there are several sharp turns. Why not make Evergreen Way wider with a median and turn lanes? Is there a plan to build Tamarack Drive to connect the north and south ends of this property in the future?
3. There should be a large visible barrier (such as a guardrail) with reflectorized signs at the sharp corner on Evergreen Way shown on these plans so vehicles do not drive off the pavement and into the drainage ditch if they miss this turn.
4. Include flow/sizing calculations for the Vortechs Model 9000 sediment chamber.
5. I still have questions about the Drainage Report and would be glad to talk to the Engineer about these issues. This report needs to be signed and stamped by a licensed PE in CT. The pipe report in Appendix A shows three 30” pipes with insufficient capacity, however, the value used for Mannings n was high. This needs to be checked. What flows and detention time was the detention basin designed for? The Drainage Report has different inlet flows in the pipe report, Appendix B and Appendix F. It is also not clear how the detention basin outlet flows were calculated. What are the expected water elevations in the
detention basin for the different storms? Again Appendix B and F have different outlet flows and water surface elevation values. What is the expected detention time for a 10 year storm in the detention basin and the duration of the discharge from the detention basin? This basin needs to be designed to hold the stormwater long enough to provide stormwater treatment, reduce the outlet flow and offset the peak discharge so there is no adverse effects such as erosion or flooding on downstream channels or properties. Over half of the proposed detention basin is to be constructed in fill. Details for the construction of this basin need to be included in the plans. Does this proposed basin need a DEP Dam Safety, Repair and Alteration permit? Extend the gravel drive to the detention basin outlet for maintenance?
6. All the roof runoff enters the level spreader at a velocity of over 5 fps and has to make a sharp turn to fill the level spreader before flowing out into the field. The configuration of the level spreader should be checked to be sure this will not cause erosion of the sides of the level spreader.
7. The Drainage Report shows a grass swale and calculations. Where is this located on the plans?
8. The culvert and old farm crossing in the drainage ditch between ECHN and this site needs to be removed and the channel restored in this area. This culvert appears to be undersized and may be clogged by debris in the channel, resulting in flooding of either adjacent site.
9. Check for conflicts between the utilities (esp storm drainage and water) and the landscaping and lighting. These need to be corrected.
10. Provide design calculations for the sanitary sewer pump station and pressure main. The long sanitary force main should have clean-outs or access ports at bends and regular intervals for maintenance access. Show these on the plan.
11. Include a detail for the transition from the sanitary force main to a gravity line upstream of the existing manhole behind LA Fitness. Consider designing the sanitary sewer main to be gravity flow for as far as possible upstream of the connection to the existing manhole behind LA Fitness to serve future buildings in this area.
12. Add items for the regular sweeping of the parking lot, sidewalks and driveways, and inspection/cleaning intervals for the Vortechs unit to the stormwater Operations and Maintenance plan (on sheet CE.5.1)
13. What is the Basin Outlet Structure detail for and where is it to be located? (On sheet CE.5.1) Is this a Temporary Basin Outlet Structure? Show where this is to be installed.
14. Include a detail for the rip rap emergency spillway construction.
15. Change the concrete sidewalk detail to show a 4 ft minimum sidewalk width.
16. Extend the trash rack to cover the upper 6” inlet orifice on the detention basin outlet structure detail.
17. The detail for the Roof Drain Pick-up needs to include a metal frame and cap if this is in pavement or a concrete sidewalk.
18. Will drains be included in the process aggregate fill over the culvert to drain any water that seeps into this material through the grass surfaces over the culvert.
19. This project must be submitted to the WPCA for review and approval.
There were no comments from the public.
Discussion ensued among the Commissioners:
Sullivan asked for clarification regarding the proposed Boulevard and how it affects the connectivity with the rest of the master plan of development. Frank Hubeny reviewed the direction of the Boulevard and the intent of an internal drive to redirect traffic from Buckland Road. The Boulevard design is incomplete at this time in order to keep flexibility for future development.
Sullivan expressed concerns regarding the driveway in place now running south from LA Fitness to the back of Old Navy. This road was also considered temporary. Within five years, the road must be completed.
Choate questioned whether the applicant feels comfortable with conforming to comments from staff? Yes.
The detention basin is designed for future development. What if future development does not happen? The outlet detention needs to be able to handle low flow. The outlet structure is sized to handle a low flow as well as future outlet being higher.
Bazzano asked if stormwater run off been a problem in the past? Doolittle: There is some erosion, but the first phase has held up very well.
What was the reason for the location of this proposed building? Office users like to be closer to the road. The easterly side of the property may have another office building. The height of the building blocks visibility of mechanicals on the roof.
Slicer asked if the driveway from LA Fitness to the proposed building is going to be a continuation of the existing road or a driveway. It isn’t far from the intersection of Deming Street and keeping traffic from Deming Street by going up Cedar would be better. Steve Mitchell, Traffic Engineer answered concerns: Traffic generated by this building will be about 100 peak hour trips. The internal connections will keep traffic moving internally, rather than down Buckland Road. Individual intersections were considered while designing this plan. Deming Street was not initially meant to handle the additional traffic. Stress on the Ellington Road and the Deming Street intersection may increase. The intersections are working well below their capability.
Doolittle recommended signs to direct traffic to Tamarack addresses due to the road being incomplete.
Kennedy suggested there are conditions that could be applied to the approval regarding the boulevard. Banach agreed and would report at the next public hearing.
Bazzano asked Banach about the parking spaces and confirmed that regulations are being followed when planning the number of spaces.
Sullivan commented on the driveway in the back of LA Fitness and the potential of becoming a shortcut even though the design is temporary. The design of the road is a 24 foot drive. A traffic study could be done to show if this is adequate. The road between LA Fitness and the shops is temporary. The manhole covers were put higher on this road in error. They will be lowered in April or May.
Choate made a motion to keep the public hearing open. Bazzano seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
REGULAR MEETING – MADDEN ROOM
Chairman Kennedy called meeting to order at 8:45p.m.
NEW BUSINESS:
Discussion/Decision/Action regarding the following:
1. Appl. 06-07P, Seth Walter, request garage addition for Silverleaf Woodworking, LLC, major home occupation for building custom furniture and interior woodwork at 63 Beechwood Lane, A-20 zone
Sullivan made a motion to approve with standard modifications as follows:
The business must be operated by the homeowner.
The permit will expire on 3/28/2011, and will have to be renewed at that time.
Only one non-resident employee can be hired.
Hours of operation are to be 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 p.m.
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.
Bazzano seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
2. Appl 06-08P, AMK Welding, request site plan of development for 13,600 sq ft building addition on 4+/- acres at 283 Sullivan Avenue, I zone
Karen Isherwood, Project Engineer of Design Professionals, presented the application:
The area to be developed is wooded with a significant amount of wetlands. Shown on the plans is a conservation easement to protect sensitive land. This is a level, low-lying site that drains southerly through an existing manmade ditch through the easement.
A new sanitary sewer will be required.
Utilities were reviewed as well as the extension of the pavement with 15 new additional parking spaces. A total of 60 spaces are on site and the parking calculations require 60.6. A waiver for one space is requested.
Drainage , storm water structures and catch basins have been proposed. Area of runoff has been reduced. With increase of impervious surface there is an immeasurable increase in run off associated with the storm events.
Landscaping was presented. Street trees along Sullivan Avenue will consist of 5 flowering pears. Red maple, blue spruce, white firs, ground cover and foundation plantings were proposed.
This public hearing will remain open until approval is granted at the IWA/CC public hearing on April 5, 2006.
Banach gave a planning report:
Request for approval for a site plan modification to add approximately 13,600 square feet to the existing building located at 283 Sullivan Ave., I zone. Maximum impervious coverage allowed is 65%, 40.8% proposed. Proposed building height is 19.7 feet; 40 feet allowed. Lot size is 90,520 sf; minimum lot size allowed is 20,000 sf. Frontage is 411 feet; minimum allowed is 100 feet. Front yard setback is 50 feet, 35 feet allowed.
The addition is proposed to the east of the existing building. There are no new curb cuts proposed; the existing driveways on Sullivan Avenue and Patria Road will service the new addition.
The parking requirement for the office and manufacturing use on this property is 61 spaces. The applicant is providing 63 spaces (including 3 handicap spaces).
The new addition will be approximately 3 feet higher than the existing building. The applicant is proposing a new color for the addition and portico and indicated that they will re-side the existing building around the corner and rebuild the existing portico to match the new entrance.
The ADRC reviewed the plans on 3/16/06 and were satisfied with the plans as presented. It is my understanding that HVAC equipment on the side of the existing building is to be removed and roof-mounted, but will not be visible from Sullivan Avenue.
The plans show that new lighting to be added consists of wall paks that will be added to the building.
There is no new signage proposed for the site.
There are regulated wetlands on the property. The applicant is pending with the IWA/CC and a public hearing is scheduled for April 5 (the previous IWA/CC hearing had to be postponed due to lack of quorum). This Commission will not be able to act on this application until after the April 5 IWA/CC meeting.
Water and sewer currently serve the property. Water Pollution Control Authority approval is required for the new sewer connection proposed.
The Fire Marshal has reviewed this proposal and has requested the extension of the parking area on the easterly side of the building to provide access to the rear of the building. The applicant has shown the driveway extension on the plan.
If this application is approved, there are no additional modifications requested.
Discussion ensued among the commissioners:
Choate commented on the look of the building being long and plain. The building will be made of steel and more than one color. The long wall will be broken up with a crab apple and a door.
Choate discussed the design needing to be more architectural pleasing. Bazzano agreed. Isherwood from DPI will come back with alterations to the design of the front of the building.
3. Appl 06-09P, Twin Manufacturing, request site plan of development modification for 30’ x 30’ helipad and 30’ x 48’ garage for helicopter storage at 273 Chapel Road, I zone
Karen Isherwood, Project Engineer of Design Professionals presented the application:
The site conforms to all zoning requirements except for the actual size. The lot size is existing non-conforming at 4.6 acres. (Regulations require lot size to be 5 acres.)
A helicopter has been operated from this site over several years. A FAA helipad has not been required due to the low amount of usage. Now that an R-44 Raven 2 helicopter has been purchased, constructing a helipad in the rear of the building is necessary. Paved access to an out building is proposed (30x48’). The outbuilding would not be seen from Chapel Road. A 6-foot chain link fence will surround the perimeter. The approach and departure area for the helicopter will require clearing the land (shown on the plans as green).
Banach gave a planning report:
Request for site plan modification approval to construct a helipad and storage shed for a helicopter at Twin Manufacturing, 273 Chapel Rd, I-291 zone. The storage shed is set back about 370 feet from Chapel Road, and the helipad itself is behind the storage shed. The site is completely surrounded by other I-291 or Industrial-zoned property. Maximum impervious coverage allowed is 65%, 55% proposed. Proposed shed height is 30 feet; 60 feet allowed. Lot size is nonconforming at 4.6 acres; minimum lot size allowed is 5 acres.
Helipads are strictly regulated by the FAA, so the applicant will be required to meet all FAA standards.
Noise over residential areas would be the Planning Dept’s biggest concern. The closest residential zone is over 1000 feet away, with the closest actual residences more than 1500 feet away (Chapel Hill condos to the east, single family homes on Chapel Road to the west across Rt 5.)
There is no new lighting shown on the plan. If there is to be any new lighting, it should be shown on the site plan and will have to conform with our lighting regulations unless our regulations do not meet FAA requirements for the helipad.
The applicant will be completely clearing the wooded area on the remainder of the site. There are no regulated wetlands on this site. IWA/CC granted conservation approval on March 1 with a $1000 bond and no unusual approval conditions.
South Windsor Police Department has indicated they have no concerns provided that the FAA is satisfied. The PD noted that there were no issues with the helicopter that was flying in and out of Electrocal on Governors Highway.
The Fire Marshal has reviewed the plan and needs to know whether there will be any helicopter fuel stored on-site.
There are no utility extensions shown to the helicopter storage shed.
If this application is approved, the Planning Dept requests no additional approval modifications except as already noted.
Discussion ensued among the commissioners:
Choate: Will facilities be needed and is fuel going to be stored on site? Facilities are not part of the plans, and there will not be fuel stored on the site.
Choate made a motion to approve Appl. 06-09P, Twin Manufacturing with modifications:
No building permit will be issued until the final mylars have been filed in the Town Clerk's office.
This application is subject to the conditions of approval of the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission, including a bond in the amount of $1000.00.
All bonds must be in one of the forms described in the enclosed Bond Policy.
An as-built plan is required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy per Section 8.1.11 of the Zoning Regulations.
All plans used in the field by the developer must bear the stamp and authorized signature of the Town of South Windsor.
The building street number must be included on the final plan.
Any new lighting must conform with Section 17.20 of the zoning regulations unless such conformance would cause a conflict with FAA regulations.
If there is any fuel storage on-site for the helicopter, such storage must be coordinated with the Fire Marshal and the Building Inspector.
Slicer seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
4. Appl 02-18P, South Windsor Technologies Conditional Subdivision – request for 3 year extension.
Pacekonis: What are the pros and cons of a three year extension? Banach: They cannot sell lots. They can construct all of the info structure without posting a bond. They will need a bond in place before they can sell lots.
Doolittle noted that the applicant is building slowly at this time.
Pacekonis made a motion to approve a request for a 3 year extension for Appl. 02-18P, South Windsor Technologies Conditional Subdivision. Bazzano seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
5. Discussion ensued among the commissioners regarding: Zoning Regulation Update and public feedback. (Exhibit A) The Commission will conduct a public hearing on the draft regulations on April 11, 2006.
Banach discussed the regulations draft and the steps taken to ensure wide distribution of the proposed changes.
South Windsor Life published an article about the draft. Responses have come in via phone, email, verbal to the Planning Department and written.
Peter DeMallie (a planner by profession) met with Banach more than once to discuss the proposed regulation changes. Law of unintended consequences is an area that Peter DeMallie assisted with to avoid unintentionally hurting somebody. The draft is good with a need for some polishing. After the public hearing on April 11, 2006, a committee could be established to follow up on the technical changes.
Kennedy discussed proposals for regulations changes that may not be in the first draft (Chamber recommendations, Redland Brick for 5 year T&C rather than 2, etc.) to be sent out with a package.
Banach recommended holding the public hearing on April 11th open in order for a new package to be created and brought back to public hearing for action.
Animals seem to be a major issue with the proposed changes to the regulations. The Animal Control Officer has asked for assistance and residents have expressed concerns about horses and sheep/goats being categorized the same in the regulation.
BONDS: Callings/Reductions/Settings
MINUTES: 2-28-2006 minutes were accepted by consensus of the Commission.
CORRESPONDENCE/REPORT:
ADJOURNMENT:
Bazzano made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:20pm. Slicer seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
Respectfully Submitted:
Barbara M. Messino, Recording Secretary
| 
