Skip Navigation
 
This table is used for column layout.
 
PZC Minutes 03-09-2010
MEMBERS PRESENT:        Chairman Patrick Kennedy, Bart Pacekonis, David Sorenson, Timothy Moriarty, Elizabeth Kuehnel and Mark Abrahamson

ALTERNATES PRESENT:Mario Marrero
                William Carroll
                Frank Bonzani

STAFF PRESENT:          Marcia Banach, Director of Planning
                Jeff Doolittle, Town Engineer

PUBLIC HEARING/COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The secretary read the legal notice as it was published in the Journal Inquirer on Thursday February 25 and Thursday March 4, 2010.
Kennedy appointed Commissioner Marrero to sit for Commissioner Wilson.  
  • Appl. 10-11P, Genevieve M. Beaurivage dba Giuseppina’s Cake and Pastries - request for a 5-year major home occupation  to operate a home-based bakery at 85 Skyline Drive, A-20 zone
The above mentioned application was withdrawn.

  • Appl. 10-12P, Nutmeg Commons and Nutmeg Village – Request for a zone change and general plan of development of 55+ acres from industrial zone (I) to Multi-family AA zone (MF-AA) to create a 202 unit multi-family complex on the southerly side of South Satellite Road and easterly of Nutmeg Road South
Attorney Ralph Alexander representing Horseshoe Lane Associates came before the Commission.  Mr. Urso is the applicant and a real-estate developer with a number of successful projects in Town.  

Peter DeMallie, Design Professionals will address the planning and community impacts of the application.  David Holmes, Capitol Studio Architects will go over the architectural design.  Karen Isherwood, Design Professionals will discuss the engineering portion of the project.  Galen Semprebon will address the traffic study.  Ben Wheeler will address the landscape plan.  

Peter DeMallie, President and Principal Design Professionals, presented the application.  Horseshoe Lane Associates, LLC of South Windsor has applied to the South Windsor Planning & Zoning Commission for a zone change to the Multi-Family (MF-AA) residential zone and General Plan of Development approval for 55.47 acre tract on South Satellite Road.  The applicant is proposing a residential condominium community designed to attract and retain Metro Hartford’s young middle class workforce.  The development will have two components.  The first is Nutmeg Village, which will have twenty detached single family homes (capes, ranches and colonials), and eight attached duplex homes, all on a cul-de-sac street along the easterly portion of the property.  The second is Nutmeg Commons which will have 174 attached townhouse residences, four or six homes to a building.  The development will have a total of 202 units.  

DeMallie went over the fiscal impact study that was completed by Donald J. Poland, AICP (see exhibit A).  Mr. Urso met with 22 residents to address their concerns.  The key decision is whether or not the land in question should be changed to multifamily zone.  Nutmeg Village is a transitional project and has no impact on surrounding property values.  Charles Dana, Town Assessor, witnessed different subdivisions and has not indicated any significant change to the surrounding properties values (exhibit B).

Dave Holmes, Principal with Capitol Studios Architects, went over the architectural design of the proposed units.  The architectural look of the building will be traditional with intersecting gables and hip roof.   Building type I will be six town house units.  They are all two bedroom units, at grade is the garage, entrance and mechanical room.  Main level is an open floor plan with kitchen, dining and living and half bath.  On the upper floor we have 2 bedrooms, full bath and laundry.  Type 2 building consists of four town house units sandwiched between end units.  A standard end unit has 2 bedrooms and 1 ½ baths; the other type of unit will be the accessible unit.  For the end units the garages are at the end of the units so that the driveways come off of the road.  The type 4 building is four town house units that are shoulder to shoulder.  The single family units will have 2 bedrooms, 2 baths and 1420 sq.ft. All of the single family units have 2 car garages.  The townhouse units will have a small deck off of the back 5’ X 7’ in size.

Karen Isherwood, Project Manager with Design Professionals gave an overview of the drainage on site.  The majority of site is lightly wooded with overgrown field areas.  The area on the north east of the site is densely vegetated. The site contains 9.7 acres of wetlands located primarily in the center and south of the property.  The site is extremely flat and has an exiting drainage pipe on the southerly portion of the site.  Lot 5 is a lot from a previous subdivision that receives discharge from lot 4; there is a detention basin with a 15 inch pipe.  There is a small basin on lot 4 that receives about 22.5 acres of runoff from the majority of the properties located on Nutmeg Road South as well as some of the Town roads.  The runoff continues to a small pond located on what was lot 5 of Dipetrio Estates Subdivision and continues southerly through a drainage channel that enters into a culver through Hilton drive, into the Charbonneau property and eventually ends up in the Podunk River. For the General Plan of Development the net buildable acreage is 44.78 acres.

Nutmeg Commons will be accessed on the westerly portion off of South Satellite Road.  The proposed parking includes 452 spaces which include 222 garage spaces, 182 driveway spaces. The applicant is also proposing to locate 48 community spaces scattered through the site. The site has a 25 ft buffer around the perimeter as required.  Developed open space requirement is 2.88 acres.  A recreation trail will make its way around the site.  There is a proposed sidewalk through the entire site as well as two bus shelters.  The wetlands to the south will have over 10 acres of undisturbed nature.  Utilities are public water and sewer.  There is a proposed sewer pump station for the site.  

Galen Semprebon, Traffic Engineer with Design Professionals addressed the traffic study.  The generation rates were equal to the counts for single-family residential.   The State Traffic Commission will also be looking at the project (Exhibit E)  

Ben Wheeler, Landscape Architect with Design Professionals addressed the landscape plan. The closest single family unit is 65 feet from the property line with the deck being 50 feet from the property line.  This puts that unit over 200 feet from the houses located on Hilton Drive and over 100 ft from the closest unit at Summerwood. The multifamily section is 450 ft away from the eastern property line and almost 600 ft to the back of the closest house on Hilton Drive.  The applicant intends to preserve as much of the vegetation as possible.  Some neighbors have requested that the invasive species be removed from the site.  The applicant will work with Town staff to meet the requirements and work with the neighbors in order to preserve existing vegetation and provide the required buffer.  In the southern end of the eastern property line the applicant is proposing to utilize the existing vegetation except for the water quality basin where an evergreen screen will be installed.  To the southern property line the mature vegetation will be used as a buffer.  Near the entrance of Nutmeg Commons there is a significant landscape plan proposed for that area.  With the feed back from the industrial neighbors, the applicant will provide a solid row of Norway spruce trees in that area.  On the single family side the applicant is proposing to plant street trees for a more residential feel.  All four of the larger building types have a mix of line shrubs and perennials included with ornamental trees.  The median will be fully landscaped and the eastern side of the entrance stone sign will be backed with perennials and ornamental trees.

Banach had the following Planning report.

Request for a zone change from Industrial to Multi-family AA for 55+/- acres of property located on South Satellite Road, and General Plan of Development for 202 housing units. The MF zone requires a minimum of 15 acres.
Section 8.3 includes criteria for zone change, including but not limited to:
  • The goals, objectives, and recommendations of the Plan of Conservation and Development;
  • The purposes of zoning and of these regulations;
  • Changes that have taken place in the rate and pattern of development and land use within the Town and adjoining communities;
  • The supply of land available in the present and proposed zone;
  • The physical suitability of the land for the proposed zone;
  • The impact on the capacity of the present and proposed utilities, streets, drainage systems, and other improvements;
  • The general character and zoning of the neighborhood;
  • Impacts on the surrounding area;
  • Traffic congestion impacts;
  • The impact on surrounding property values;
  • The environmental impacts;
  • The health and general welfare of the community;
  • Neighborhood acceptance weighed against community needs; and
  • The protection of historic factors.
The Town Plan indicates that the land along Route 5 should remain as Economic Development land. The subject site is surrounded by Industrially-zoned land to the north and west, plus about half of the property boundary to the south; and as residentially-zoned on the remainder of the land to the south, and to the east.
The possible uses in the MF zone are limited strictly to dwelling units; no other primary uses are allowed. Potential uses in the Industrial zone include:
  • automobile sales, service and repair;
  • sales of building and landscaping materials;
  • manufacture of bricks, cement products, tile and terra cotta;
  • manufacture, processing, packaging and assembly of components or goods;
  • offices - professional, commercial, corporate and business;
  • plumbing, heating, electrical, mechanical industrial and general contracting establishments;
  • printing and publishing, graphic arts processes, sign shop painting;
  • solid waste, recycling, transfer station facilities;
  • truck and freight terminals; and
  • warehouses and distribution centers.
The purpose of the general plan is to show the planned use and layout of the property if the zone change is approved, including the general layout of utilities, drainage, open space and recreation areas. Special exception and site plan of development approval would be required prior to any construction on this site. The information depicted in the General Plan is meant to be viewed as general information, with engineering details to be provided at the site plan stage. This two-step method provides the opportunity for the Commission to determine whether the multi-family use is appropriate for this site, and to make meaningful revisions if appropriate, prior to the applicant spending a substantial amount of money on full engineering.
A zone change is the appropriate time to discuss traffic impacts. The applicant’s traffic report indicates that the area roadway network is generally sufficient to accommodate traffic generated by the proposed development with one exception that will be noted in the Town Engineer’s comments.
There is a 25’ buffer requirement along all property boundaries except the street frontage. The buffer plantings must be designed by a licensed landscape architect. The buffer must obscure most of the view between the residential and non-residential zones within 5 years, and substantially block the view at maturity.
The survey shows that there are numerous encroachments by adjoining property onto the subject site, including an industrial storage trailer, a playscape, shed, horseshoe pits, benches, lawn areas, and debris dumping. As these encroachments occur within the required buffer area, the applicant will need to reclaim these areas for buffer planting.
Proposed impervious coverage is about 7%, 60% allowed. Maximum proposed building height is about 31 feet, 35 feet allowed.
There are regulated wetlands on this site. The quantity and distribution of the wetlands have most likely contributed to the general lack of interest in this property for industrial uses. IWA/CC approval is not required for the general plan; if PZC approves this application, then the applicant will need IWA/CC approval for the site plan.
We also note that along the lower west property boundary, there is a drainage easement and a drainage pipe that is not quite in the easement. This would be a good time to correct the easement to encompass the actual drainage pipe. The drainage easement is within the required buffer area, and the landscaping plan shows buffer plantings outside of the drainage easement.
Public water and sewer are available. The applicant’s engineer has indicated that the utilities have adequate capacity to support this development. The Supt of Pollution Control has indicated that if any sewer upgrades are necessary, the developer will be responsible for providing the upgrades.
The MF zone requires 600 sq ft of developed recreation area per unit. The applicant has designated several level lawn areas and a walking trail for developed recreation. The walking trail as shown is 4’ wide with bark mulch. Town staff, including the SW Police Dept, recommend that the path be wider and constructed with a more permanent material such as stone dust to facilitate both active recreation and police patrols.
There are several single-family units within about 15’ of the side yard setback line. The applicant should be aware that placement of decks, pools and sheds will be very limited for these units.
It is unclear at this time how trash disposal will be handled. Staff request that if there are going to be dumpster pads, the pad locations be shown on the general plan rather than being designed as an afterthought.
The site is more than 500 feet from a Town boundary, so no referral to CRCOG was required.
If this zone change is approved, the Commission must state on the record that you have found the zone change to be consistent with the Town Plan of Conservation and Development. Also, the Planning Dept requests that in addition to already-noted comments, the applicant add north arrows to all sheets.
Doolittle had an engineering report as follows.
  • A complete analysis of the drainage system proposed for this development and a complete inspection and analysis of the existing drainage system from the proposed development on this parcel all the way down to the Podunk River must be completed.  This includes existing drainage swales, channels, ponds, pipes, etc.  The analysis must show sufficient capacity and headwater in all parts of the system for the proposed discharges for all storm events from the 2 year to the 100 year.  The Town will witness all inspections of the existing drainage system and review the analysis.  The developer will be responsible for any drainage improvements necessary to accommodate the proposed development.  
  • Peak sewer flows expected from this proposed development must be submitted to the Town for the determination as to whether there is sufficient reserve capacity in the sewer system downstream of this proposed development.  The developer will be responsible for any sewer improvements necessary to accommodate the proposed development.  
  • Extend the proposed sidewalk along South Satellite road to the end of this road, or at least to tie into the sidewalks at the eastern entrance to the single family/duplex section.  
  • Provide gravel access roads to the water quality basins and detention basins inlets and outlets for inspection and maintenance.  
  • The plans show a few smaller basins with no outlet.  Where will the water go from these basins?  The stormwater management plan must include treatment/control of mosquitoes and other undesirable critters as well as litter/debris pick-up and the usual stormwater basin maintenance requirements.  
  • What is the rectangular outlet shown from the larger basin on the west side of the property?  
  • What does the circle in the open space to the north west of the cul-de-sac mark?
  • The existing drainage channels and swales on this property that are to be used should be cleaned out, defined and stabilized prior to use.  
  • In the proposed water quality basin at the south east corner of the site, why is the outlet elevation of the V-Notch Weir higher than the inlet pipe elevation?  
  • The front and rear yards of the proposed units must have enough pitch to drain to the storm drain system in the street or to open space with provisions to accommodate this stormwater.  There should not be stormwater ponding near residential units.  
  • Soils information from borings and/or test pits should be provided for this site.  
  • The recreational paths through and around this proposed development should have a good gravel base and a firm, low maintenance surface such as bituminous pavement or compacted stone dust.  This will allow pedestrians, bikes, handicap persons, and emergency vehicles to use these paths and reduce the maintenance required.  
  • This development should be designed and constructed to South Windsor Town Standards.   
  • The traffic analysis shows a Level Of Service D for the westbound leg of the intersection of South Satellite Road and Route 5.  It also shows a slight degradation of the overall LOS for this intersection from A to B.  Although this is a slight change, I am concerned about the increased traffic using this intersection from this development (with a LOS D westbound) and how this intersection will accommodate this increased traffic from this development over the long term.  The Developer should contact the Connecticut DOT to inquire about adjusting the timing of this signal and/or making other minor modifications needed to improve the LOS at this intersection.  
There was public participation in favor and against the application as follows.
 
Robert Dickenson, 19 Birch Road- agrees with sidewalks along South Satellite Road which would provide for eventual connection to Rte. 5 as already addressed by Town Engineer.  Mr. Dickenson recommended individual refuse containers for residents in the proposed development instead of dumpsters for the entire site.    

Rudy Capello, resident of Summerwood, is in support of the zone change since it would bring affordable housing to the town.  

Carol Fiorita, 95 Hilton Road, spoke in opposition to the zone change. She presented a petition with ver 40 signatures opposing the zone change.  The resident feels that most people did not know about the development and is disappointed with the lack of recreation for the site, the children on the proposed development will be using the public pool and Town facilities since there will be nothing for them to do.    

Roger Merrill, Hilton Drive is, concerned with the proximity of the site to the pond and the school buses not having sufficient room to turn around.  

Richard Ferita, abutting neighbor, is apposed to the zone change.  The resident does not agree with putting a residential development with access through an industrial area, could be potentially dangerous for the children and not appealing to buyers.  

Tony Sansone, 87 Hilton Drive, had concerns with flooding on the property. The property has lower elevations and the water does not drain properly off the site, it drains towards the houses on Hilton Drive.  About 10 to 15 years ago the TOSW gave up their easement on the piping system and it is failing, the houses on the east have water issues.  Mosquito problems will be horrible.  

David Kostyk, business owner and resident, 175 South Satellite, has concerns about the impacts on his business and would like to see a copy of the Impact Analysis.   Two entrances are proposed off of South Satellite Road, no entrances proposed for Pleasant Valley Road.  The resident is concerned with traffic issues that the proposed residential would bring to Pleasant Valley Road, would like clarification on sidewalks on South Satellite Road. The resident explained that when a tractor trailer stops at the intersection of South Satellite and S. Nutmeg where the train tracks are it doesn’t trip the light causing traffic to back up, that should be a concern.  Also there is no stop sign on South Satellite Road and this should be addressed.  Street lights should be installed all the way down South Satellite, the lights are needed since currently it is very dark and the lights stop at CT. Packaging.  In the past their have been noise complaints and conflicts between the residential and the industrial.  Currently there are problems with the children in the area on business properties causing safety concerns. Pictures were submitted for the record showing several youths riding bicycles on the industrial parking lots.(Exhibit1)   

Shek Hong, 161 South Satellite Road- Business owner, spoke against the zone change, feels that if the zone change goes through the property value will go down and the business owners will have a difficult time selling the properties. Children will view the industrial park as a recreation area which is very dangerous.  Who is liable for any accident on the property?  

Rob Potech, owner 145 South Satellite, is opposed to the application, there is a potential for issues between industrial and residential property owners. The proposed buffer is not wide enough between the proposed development and the industrial.  The noise will be a problem in the future as well as safety concerns with the heavy truck users.  The entrance on South Satellite is almost directly across from Mr. Potech’s property why not an entrance through Pleasant Valley which is a residential neighborhood instead of an industrial park.  The resident did not receive an invitation to the meeting held by the applicant.    

Bill Molleslus, Summerwood Lane requested clarification about the time table for the development.  At the end of four years will it be completely developed?  

Karen McClain,  26 Edgewood Drive, concerns centered on traffic during regular hours, public transportation, lack of recreation.  The traffic study doesn’t address the issue of residents traveling on weekends in and out of the proposed residential development heading to the shopping mall or Stop & Shop Plaza.  From experience the resident feels that South Satellite is not pedestrian friendly and it is potentially dangerous for children.       

Robert Link, 79 Hilton Drive, concerns with drainage issues, a stop sign that no one actually stops at as well as increase in density and traffic. The development will bring an increase in children using the town facilities.  The resident looked up the 2000 U.S census study for public school age children and found different numbers.  

Salvatore Neri – 102 South Satellite, foresees major traffic issues if the zone change is approved.   In the past Mr. Neri had windows shot out of commercial vehicles on the property and problems with people dumping garbage on his property.  The proposed development has no amenities to attract young working class.     

A petition was submitted for the record by the residents opposing the proposed zone change (Exhibit D).

Attorney Mark Shipman, representing Connecticut Packaging Materials Inc., 85 South Satellite Road, spoke in opposition to the zone change. A written presentation was submitted for the record (Exhibit F).  Attorney Shipman mentioned that this zone change would end the supply of industrial land in South Windsor.  If the zone change is approved it carves out the center of the Industrial zone which looks more like spot zoning than a transitional use.  Transitional zones are borders and should be staged between two zones.  The general character of the neighborhood is industrial.  The neighborhood has expressed their concerns and not many spoke in favor of the zone change.  Where is the need to change 6% of the industrial land to residential?

Mr. Shipman disagrees with the applicant’s statement that the residential will bring more revenue to the Town than an industrial user.  Mr. Shipman’s client has 4.98 acres and pays $67,572.42 in real estate taxes exclusive of his trucks and vehicles.  This zone change is not consistent with the Towns Plan of Conservation and Development.  

The traffic study does not address the impacts of large trucks arriving at 5:30 in the morning.  The study does not consider queuing problems at the railroad tracks.  An Industrial development provides revenue and uses few services unlike a residential development that will require schools, recreation and police services.  If an industrial user wanted to expand it would cause a conflict with the residents.  The residential does not fit in with the industrial and the land in question should remain industrial.    

Elizabeth Pendleton, 319 Hilton Drive, spoke in opposition to the zone change is concerned with excess traffic.  

Craig Stevenson, Economic Developer spoke in favor of the zone change.  The zone change would help enhance the viability of the Route 5 area.  The addition of residential to the area could aid in the ability to attract higher end uses to route 5.  Affordable housing is work force housing for young people who will need a place to live.  CT Studios is a new major employer that will have a need for housing that could be met by this project.  (Exhibit 2)

Sorenson read the petition signed by 42 residents opposing the zone change (Exhibit C)
Sorenson also read the correspondence received (Exhibits 3-14).  

Commissioners had questions and concerns.  Responses will be in italics.  
  • Commissioners asked for clarification about the proposed landscaping for the site.
Mr. Wheeler responded that the applicant would salvage as much of the vegetation as possible in the buffer and set back areas and work with Town Staff and residents with the invasive species.  The plan shows additional planting of evergreens and ornamental and deciduous trees in that area.  
  • Commissioners asked if the buffer would screen the existing homes from the new development.
Wheeler responded that the homes will be substantially screened from the existing homes and Pleasant Valley Estates.  

  • Commissioners asked if there is a history of pedestrian activity other than the pictures that were submitted for the record
Doolittle responded that he has no information regarding pedestrian activity; there are no sidewalks and no pedestrian facilities.

Commissioner Pacekonis thanked the public for their input.  Commission members need to look at the review criteria and how it relates to the zone change.  Pacekonis had the following concerns:
  • There are no amenities with this proposed development and nothing in the presentation leads the commission to believe that it will attract the young workforce.  
  • Concerns with the sidewalks and if they will be plowed
  • Handicap ramps should be added to the plan
  • After reviewing the plan he agrees with Attorney Shipman that the zone change is cutting out a portion of the industrial zone.
  • Agrees that an access drive off of Pleasant Valley would make it more palatable.
  • Is the turn around at the end of South Satellite sufficient for a school bus to turn around?
Doolittle mentioned that the cul-de-sac has a diameter in excess of 130 ft. which is plenty of room for a school bus to turn around.  

  • Commissioners asked for clarification on the drainage issues on Hilton Drive and the easement that the resident mentioned was given up by the Town.   
 
Doolittle mentioned that there are numerous drainage issues on Hilton Drive.  The initial developer installed under drains behind the houses because he realized it was a wet area. The developer put an easement in an attempt to give it to the Town and through the years it was not maintained and was disturbed by sheds, leaves and play skates.  The Town through its attorney made the decision that the easement was solely for the benefit of the property owners.  It’s an old system about 50 years old and it’s probably experiencing severe problems.

  • Commissioners need more time to review the sidewalks on the plan.
Banach mentioned that there is a sidewalk shown from the western most entrance of the site up to the bus stop.  The section where there is no side walk is between the two side entrances. The commission can require sidewalks for this section.

  • Commissioners asked if the applicant talked to the residents in the area.
Peter DeMallie responded that a public meeting was held in the Town library for the abutting neighbors and the Summerwood neighborhood. Mr. Urso met with some industrial users  and went door to door on Sharon Drive, Hilton Drive, Pleasant Valley and Summerwood.  

Anthony Sansone, resident, asked for clarification on the buffer.

Banach responded that it would be a 25 ft buffer and a 25 ft side yard set back.

Kennedy requested clarification about the number of school aged children that the development would generate.

Donald Poland, AICP, Connecticut Planning & Development explained the report in regards to the number of school age children that the proposed development is expected to generate.  Mr. Poland explained that the difference in the number of school aged children that a development generates is directly related to how many bedrooms each unit has. Single family detached housing units with less than 4 bedrooms generate less than one school age and public school age child per household.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

Larry Ridgefield, owner of CT Packaging Materials Inc. expressed his concerns with the incompatibility of the Industrial business and proposed residential use.  

  • Commissioners discussed whether or not to continue the public hearing.  
Pacekonis made a motion to continue the public hearing.  Kuehnel seconded the motion.
 
The motion carried 4 to 3.  Commissioners Pacekonis, Moriarty, Kuehnel and Marrero voted in favor of keeping the hearing open.  Commissioners Kennedy, Sorenson and Abrahamson voted against keeping the hearing open.

The hearing was continued to April 13, 2010.

The meeting ended at 11:58 PM.

Respectfully submitted

Approved by PZC 4-13-10
D. Maria Acevedo

Recording Secretary