MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Patrick Kennedy, Gary Bazzano, Cliff Slicer, Michael Sullivan, Suzanne Choate, Bart Pacekonis and Louise Evans
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Daniel Jeski, David Sorenson
STAFF PRESENT: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning
PUBLIC HEARING – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Chairman Kennedy called the Public Hearing to order at 7:30 p.m.
Bazzano read the legal as it was published in the Journal Inquirer on August 28 and September 7, 2006.
1. Appl 06-42P, Evergreen Walk, LLC, request for zoning amendment to Section 5.8 to add multi-family residential use as a Special Exception use under certain conditions in the Buckland Road Gateway Development Zone.
Alan Lamson, AIA, AICP of FLB Architecture & Planning along with Stephen Mitchell, PE of F.A. Hesketh Associates, John Mullin, Ph.D., FAICP of Mullin Associates and Tom Baum, President of Bozzuto Development Group presented the above mentioned application. The major points of the application presented were traffic and fiscal impacts as well as an overview of the Master Plan of Development.
A slide show presentation was shown of the following: (See Exhibit A) the approved general plan of development; Evergreen Walk-existing 8/2006; aerial views; the proposed residential use in the Gateway Zone.
Details of the proposed regulation changes were presented to the commission (Exhibit B). The memorandum prepared by Stephen Mitchell, which covered the potential traffic impact, was reviewed in detail (Exhibit C). News articles reporting on new zoning regulations that are needed for the changes in demographics as well as the change in shopping centers from traditional malls to mixed-use lifestyle centers and an interview conducted by Renee Montagne, the host of The Morning edition on NPR News, with Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning, were distributed to the commissioners for review (Exhibit D).
The fiscal impact report (Exhibit E) was presented in detail. It included how the impact is calculated; costing methods; why use of fiscal impact analyses is beneficial; and a detailed developer’s statement.
Tom Baum, President of Bozzuto Development Company, discussed the development of retail with residential and noted that it creates benefits for both. The history and company profile of the Bozzuto Development Company were presented. Exhibit A1 shows the section of the slide show Baum reviewed which gives a visual of retail/residential developments that have been developed by Bozzuto. Target markets tend to be young professionals, some “snow birds” as well as empty nesters. The majority of units are expensive, mostly one bedroom with under 1000 square feet. The essential ingredient of this development, if done correctly, will create a town center feel.
Banach gave the following planning report:
1. Request for amendment to Section 5.8 of the zoning regulations to allow limited multifamily residential use by Special Exception in the Buckland Gateway zone. The current regulations do not allow residential use; however, institutional uses such as Assisted Living Facilities are allowed within the Gateway zone.
2. The Future Land Use section of the Town Plan of Conservation and Development includes a statement that, “Mixed uses, designed to replicate a more traditional way of life, may be appropriate in some areas such as the Buckland Road Gateway Development Zone.” The proposed amendment is thus consistent with the Town Plan. The introduction of high-density housing into the Evergreen Walk development complex, if done properly, will be the missing element that injects constant vitality into the development. A well-integrated housing component can add a number of valuable traits, including:
¨ the ability to walk to work, shopping, dining and recreation;
¨ “eyes on the street,” neighbors watching out for the area at all times, including after business hours;
¨ another type of housing choice that does not currently exist in South Windsor and will appeal to corporations that have a choice of prime sites to construct their offices.
Ideally, the question is not whether there will be a residential component to the Gateway Zone, but how the residential component will look and operate. The key to a successful housing component in a mixed-use area is the complete integration of the housing itself into the rest of the development, with very strong pedestrian interconnections throughout the site. It would not be particularly desirable to have scattered multi-family developments that are not part of a mixed-use community spread out over the Gateway Zone. Mixed-use by its very definition includes several different uses as has been established at Evergreen Walk. The proposed zoning amendment addresses this requirement early in the text (section 5.8.6.c.4).
3. The proposed amendment is constructed after the style of some of our more successful zoning elements. For example, there are site design objectives and standards, and building design objectives and standards, following the style of the Gateway Zone retail building objectives and standards. This style of regulation has resulted in the very attractive construction that has occurred to date in the Gateway Zone. The proposed amendment also requires a General Plan/Special Exception approval as the first step, followed by site plan approval to finalize site engineering and details.
4. One of the ramifications of a zoning amendment that must be examined is the infrastructure impacts of the amendment. For residential development vs. commercial development, two of the main questions are the impact on taxes as well as the number of school children and impact on schools. The applicant has provided information regarding both of these questions. Unfortunately, we don’t have any residential developments with which to analyze the numbers of school children as we have no apartment complexes except for seniors. It would not be a legitimate analysis to compare our existing condominium complexes with rental apartment complexes because we
don’t know what the owner vs. renter status variable does to the number of school children per unit equation.
5. Traffic impacts should also be considered when a zoning amendment is proposed. The 243-acre Evergreen Walk property has a State Traffic Certificate that currently allows about 375,000 square feet of retail development, 75,000 square feet of indoor recreation, 130,000 square feet of hotel space, and 650,000 square feet of office development. Addition of a residential component would need STC review and approval and would use up some of the capacity that is currently assigned to one of the other land use categories (except retail, which will be close to full-build when Phase III is completed).
Commissioners may recall that when the original Evergreen Walk General Plan was approved, there were several unallocated areas on the west side of the site that were labeled “future development.” These unallocated areas, no matter what land use is proposed for them, will all need future approval from both the PZC and the State Traffic Commission. The good news is that the long-awaited, comprehensive Buckland Hills Area Transportation Study has finally been initiated by the State Dept of Transportation. South Windsor and Manchester staff will be an integral part of this study, and elected Town officials and other stakeholders will also play a large part in the study process.
6. The Commission should also consider precedence when examining a zoning amendment. If this amendment is adopted as proposed, there could be a maximum of about 50 acres of residential development within the approximately 400 acres that comprise the Gateway zone. With the proposed 25-acre minimum parcel size, that equals a maximum of two separate residential developments. Staff notes that, if the Commission does adopt this amendment and is then satisfied with the results after one or two projects are constructed, the cap could be raised similar to the raising of the SRD cap after the first successful SRD projects.
7. The Capitol Region Council of Governments has reviewed the proposed amendment as required. CRCOG provided the following report: --READ--
8. Police Chief Gary Tyler is present tonight and will address the Commission regarding anticipated impacts of upscale apartment on the Police Department.
9. If this amendment is approved, the Planning Department suggests that we clarify that General Plan/Special Exception is the first step, to be followed by site plan approval.
Gary Tyler, Chief of Police had comments regarding impacts of the application on crime, traffic and safety. The police department has been in the planning stages for a number of years anticipating the impacts of Evergreen Walk on the provision of police services. He noted that the impact of adding a residential component should be minimal, especially because the residences will be upscale; There is already a functioning police substation at Evergreen Walk, and traffic has easy access to the highway. The police department looks forward to the development and feels it adds to the ambiance of the area.
There were comments from the public in favor and in opposition to the application.
Craig Kochanski, resident of South Windsor: The development is a good idea. It should not be limited to the area proposed. All of the gateway zones should be considered. Two or three bedroom condominiums should be considered.
Peter DeMallie, Design Professionals, Inc.: The minimum lot size should be smaller because there are many other properties on Buckland Road that are less than 20 acres in size and owners should not be forced to combine their properties. . The notion of mixed use is a good one. There is an opportunity for a transitional use between the properties on the easterly side of Buckland Road and single family residential properties up at the top of the hill off of Deming Street. The highest quality should be insisted upon.
Craig Stevenson, Economic Developer of SW: New urbanism is a creation of a diverse; compact; vibrant mixed use community that has the same components as conventional development and are assembled in an integrated fashion. The town planner discussed the importance of integration. This application promotes the basic principals of new urbanism. Research shows that there are 4000 of these types of projects going on around the country. About ½ are in historic urban centers.
Stevenson listed some of the benefits to the proposed project: Higher quality of life; stable property values; less traffic and congestion and less driving. Business will have a built-in clientele. The area of development will be more attractive. The benefits to the town: Stability; appreciating tax base; community spends less per capita on infrastructure and utilities; increase in the tax base; ability to preserve more of our natural resources due to clustering the buildings together. This development makes the town more attractive.
Cary Prague, 60 Krawski Drive, noted that he is neutral to this proposal. He suggested that the Commission encourage the residents to attend the meetings for this application and consider Saturday sessions. He noted that South Windsor has changed since he was a child and for the better. Craig Stevenson mentioned new urbanism being good for areas in trouble. South Windsor is not in trouble and does not need to be saved. The project has been referred to as Town Center. This is on the edge of town. This should not be an area that is a subsection of town. Hiring independent experts to do a traffic report and a fiscal impact report is important. Candlewood Apartments began with young people and not many children. They are now condominiums and have many
children.
Tim Moriarty, 90 Skyline Drive, said that he finds apartments to be “scary.” Avalon Apartments in Manchester started out as quality and then quickly declined in condition. Apartments labeled as luxury units are only as good as the management firm. When the economy declines, money for upkeep and maintenance gets cut back. With rent being anywhere from $1800 and up, it is misleading to state that young couples saving for a home will live here. The statistics on the number of school children in the system reported is hard to believe. Finding a mortgage on a mixed use property in Connecticut will be hard. If the same person purchases commercial with residential above, the transaction becomes commercial.
Tom Delnicki, 130 Felt Road, told the Commission that he has been living in South Windsor for 50 years, and that heis speaking in opposition to this proposal. It needs to be determined if this development is good for South Windsor, or only good for Evergreen Walk. There are concerns regarding rental prices and the idea of young people affording them. Corporations coming into town do not choose locations based on apartments but on highway accessibility, tax breaks, location and nice homes for management. As for residential in Evergreen Walk adding to South Windsor’s long term viability, Manchester Parkade failed with this idea. Concerns regarding apartments include transient housing; lower taxes paid by residents in apartments; traffic; number of units proposed; and the impact on Town
services. People move to South Windsor for the school system.
Al Pilver, 68 Fairview Drive: Rental units raise a concern because there is no motivation to upkeep the property and/or building.
William Aman, 878 Strong Road: Although speaking against this change, he is not opposed to apartments. In the past 20 years, there have been no apartments built in South Windsor. Concerns with this project are with its size and the long term mix of residential and commercial. The revitalization of downtown Hartford was not the success it had planned to be; neither has the Bristol Mall. The New Haven coliseum is being torn down due to bad planning. Over the next 5 to 10 years, this project should be successful, but will not bemaintained. Retail goes through phases unlike residential so mixing them is a risk. Concerns also include targeting young professionals for luxury apartments. As deterioration takes place, future commissions will need to make decisions that are
purely financial.
Vicky Margiott, 32 Sele Drive: “Just say no.” When Evergreen Walk was first proposed it was stated that the Town of South Windsor’s ratio of commercial and residential was determined to be unbalanced and by building Evergreen Walk, we were going to improve the ratio. The Gateway Zone regulation review committee had decided not to include residential uses. There are concerns regarding the number of children this development will bring into the school system. It isn’t clear about who is going to live in this new development. There isn’t public participation during the preliminary discussions. There is a requirement in the Gateway Zone for a smooth flow of traffic and as it appears now, South Windsor is very close to having D level intersections.
The commission should stop allowing development in the Gateway Zone. If there is no economic viability for some of the land in the gateway zone to be developed then it should remain open. Concerns with the fiscal assessment are with how the numbers are calculated. Residential units so close to the highway are more prone to crime. Traffic will increase and the stability of businesses already in town will decrease. Our wildlife is suffering as more trees in the Gateway Zone are taken down.
Barbara Barbour, 5 Old Parish Drive: As the proposal stands, she is against it. Her concerns are with the size of the development and what will happen if there is an economic downturn. Homeowners will continue to maintain their home whereas apartment owners have the ability to move as hard times hit. History shows that within the first few years, apartments tend to be sold off. There are also concerns that the expectations of the target market for these units are not realistic and the target will change. Can we compete with the new development of luxury apartments in Hartford?
Liz Pendleton, 319 Hilton Drive: There doesn’t seem to be a problem with some residential above commercial. A stand-alone apartment building structure would not be a good idea. Our resources would need to be increased. The cost would outweigh the benefits. Credit is given to the commission in considering this application but to change zoning for this application is only fooling the residents in South Windsor.
Bazzano read letters from the public into the record (exhibits x-y).
Discussion ensued among the commissioners. (Responses will be in italics)
Evans: The zoning regulations are a dynamic force and do get changed from time to time but still should reflect our plan of conservation and development for the Town. Full-time management on-site should be considered to even out the concerns regarding rentals and pride of ownership that may be lacking. Clarification is needed on the integration of residential and commercial. Will existing retail be included in the integration? Other concerns: Floodplains should be considered when calculating gross acreage; how were percentages arrived at? Initial quality, and the future conditions of the buildings, are very important.
Bazzano: Wording for this application does not include “upscale” apartments. The proposed regulation seems to indicate there can be no adverse impacts to existing infrastructure. If there are impacts, an applicant is responsible for mitigating those impacts. Regarding building design requirements, explain “building mass at residential scale: Whatever buildings are proposed, the heights, setbacks, change in materials and colors will be scaled down as the buildings are designed so that they are at a “human” scale and not massive. An independent study on the traffic impact should be done.
Bazzano: Other concerns include the reliability of the consultant reports and the degree of integration with the Shops. In the original PZC planning for Evergreen Walk, residential was not included. Evans noted that residential use was not originally considered while developing the Gateway zone regulations. It should be determined whether or not the area is in need of this type of development.
The applicant discussed how percentages and data were arrived at and noted that the statistics regarding numbers of school children generated by similar developments have held up over time. Banach noted that she had contacted the Board of Education to obtain the numbers of school children in Strawbridge and Plum Ridge condominiums, as they are our most upscale condominium developments. One of the developments has one child per ten (10) units with the other having one (1) child for every five (5) units. Integration and how it is proposed with the existing commercial development was reviewed. Other issues will be responded to at the next public hearing date.
Chaote: Concerns are with the size of the development allowed by this amendment and the future of the development.
Pacekonis: Concerned with the size of the development and sustainability. He noted that sustainability is a fact of life everywhere and is not simply a result of “poor planning.” He mentioned issues with density and the quality of the rental properties over the long term. As properties change ownership the dollars and cents become the main focus.
Sullivan questioned whether there are any other properties within the Gateway Zone that are at least 25 acres in size. Banach responded that she would research the question and report back at the public hearing continuation. Sullivan asked how you get two developable properties under this regulation? The regulation limits the amount of land area in the Gateway Development zone that can be used for residential purposes to 13½ percent. There are roughly 400 acres in the Gateway zone and 13½ percent is 54 acres. Any site used for residential development must be 25 acres.
Sullivan: Reports state that a 25½ acre development would have 378 units. The traffic report states that 614 units can be developed. This is contradictory. Spot zoning is a concern as well as the wording used in this proposal regarding integration. Public transportation should be included when planning this development. It is actually not contradictory, as there is no maximum on either acreage or number of units in a development. The total number of units in the Gateway Zone is capped by the 13.5% area limitation. Wording will be looked at closely while reviewing the proposal.
Jeski: Proposed change to regulation 5.8.6.C.4(1)(a) is a concern, as that section is an objective that is not mandatory, however the word “shall” is included in the objective, which makes it mandatory. Density calculations are a concern as well as spot zoning.
Kennedy: In the proposal, only 18% of the units are “mixed use,” so 82% are purely residential. He questioned whether our existing Mixed Uses in Commercial Zones regulation could be amended to include the Gateway Zone. Banach responded that such an amendment is possible, but requires commercial use on the bottom floor and residential use above, with no stand-alone residential buildings. Kennedy asked whether there are any limitations on the number of bedrooms per unit, and any limitations on the number of buildings in the proposed amendment. No limitations on either. Kennedy also questioned whether there is any wording in the proposal that mandates upscale design. No, but within the Gateway Zone the regulations regarding design are strong enough that the Commission generally gets the type of
development that PZC intended.
Kennedy: There will be approximately 300 apartments that would be purely residential. There are many multifamily developments already in close proximity to Evergreen Walk. They are separated from Evergreen Walk by wetlands. If the same type of apartments that exist across from the Buckland Hills Mall was proposed under this new amendment, what provisions in the amendment would allow PZC to deny it? The complex is too tall, too dense (20 units per acre), isn’t integrated into the mall, and doesn’t have live/work units in it.
Kennedy: There are also concerns regarding the impact on the school district; a need for a cost analysis of residential vs. commercial; turnover of apartments and the number of children growing as the building ages; the speed of appreciation. Apartments do appreciate in value over time in growing towns, but not as rapidly as single-family homes. There is a large amount of seasonal traffic around Christmas; how would residential traffic interact with the mall traffic? There is already a substantial amount of traffic on Buckland Road, about half of which is commuter traffic. Mixed uses tend to even out the traffic flow in both directions, so there is not such a marked reversal of traffic direction between the a.m. and p.m. peak levels.
Kennedy reviewed the traffic study and clarified what scenarios were included.
Slicer: There are concerns with the developments used for comparison in the reports. The Commission would prefer comparisons from towns with similar demographic characteristics to South Windsor. The financial analysis also needs some clarification; and wording to describe upscale or luxury housing needs to be addressed.
Bazzano made a motion to keep the public hearing open. Sullivan seconded the motion. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
Respectfully Submitted:
Barbara M. Messino
Recording Secretary
Planning and Zoning Commission
| 
