MEMBERS PRESENT: Patrick Kennedy, Bart Pacekonis, Mario Marrero, Dave Sorenson, Elizabeth Kuehnel
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Kevin Foley, Gary Pitcock
STAFF PRESENT: Michele Lipe, Town Planner
APPLICATIONS TO BE OFFICIALLY RECEIVED:
- Application 11-24P, Evergreen Walk LLC - Request for a modification to~General~Plan of Development~layout associated with existing Special Exception, ~Application #07-42P, which was approved on October 7, 2007~ [including 200 residential dwelling units and associated facilities], and Final Plan approval, both pursuant to Section 4.2.15~to include: relocation of residential~structures [totaling 203,447 square feet]; 109,755 square feet of commercial space [121 hotel rooms (71,550 square feet)]; general commercial space (9,800 square feet); office space (28,405 square feet)]; to be completed in two phases and to be located on a portion of 151 Buckland Road [within "Evergreen Walk"~ ~including portions of Units 6 and 7], and being approximately 1,200 feet west of Buckland Road and 400 feet north
of Smith Street; ~Buckland Road Gateway Development Zone.
- Appl 11-25P, Paschetto Major Home Occupation – request for a 5-year renewal for an electrology office on property located at 89 Glenwood Road, A-30 zone
- Appl 11-26P, Tuscan Hill Site Plan – request for site plan modification for one new building, totaling 4,750 sf of office, for property locate at 218 Buckland Road, Buckland Road Gateway Development zone
PUBLIC HEARING/COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Kennedy called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Commissioner K. Foley to sit for W. Carroll and G. Pitcock sat V. Wilson.
Commissioner D. Sorenson read legal notice.
- Appl 11-21P, Jon Chuck and Noah Hebbe – (Chuck Zoning amendment) – request to amend the zoning regulations to add “Residential Care Home (Facility)” to Table 3.1.1.A Residential Zones as a special exception use in RR and A-40 zones; to add same use to Article 10 Definitions, and add Section 7.20 Residential Care Home (Facility)
Jon Chuck and Noah Hebbe were present to discuss the proposed regulation that would allow for a residential care home to be operated in the A-40 and RR zone by special exception approval. (See attachment A.) Chuck reviewed the proposed criteria for the site as well as the services proposed to be provided. He indicated that this facility would be licensed by the State Department of Public Health and would have to meet all of their requirements as well as the requirements of the Building and Fire Codes.
Michele Lipe gave the following Planning Department Report.
Request for amendment to add provision to allow for Residential Care Homes to be allowed by Special exception in the A-40 and RR zones. As defined, RCH means “ an institution having facilities and all necessary personnel to furnish food, shelter and laundry for two or more persons 55 years of age or older unrelated to the proprietor and in additions, to provide services of a personal nature may which do not requires the training or skills of a licensed nurse. Additional services of a personal nature may include assistance with bathing, help with dressing, preparation of special dies and supervision over medications which are self-administered.”
The applicant has also developed specific site criteria that would have to be addressed in a site plan at the time of the application. As the regulation is drafted, properties within the RR and A-40 zones would be eligible.
The current regulations allow for the development of Elderly Housing complexes, Senior residence developments as well as Assisted Living Facilities, hospital, sanitariums and convalescent nursing homes. These latter uses require skilled nursing. This type of housing at this scale would be the first of its kind allowing the conversion of an existing home into a residential care home and would not include skilled nursing.
The Housing Element of the Town Plan of Conservation includes goals that are relevant to this application, including:
- Develop housing to meet the needs of the entire community, including but not limited to: small families, large families, the elderly, single adult households, various income levels, and
- Develop a full range of housing styles, types, sizes, densities, affordability, and forms of ownership in order to meet the housing needs of the community.
This use would be licensed by the Department of Health and would be subject to their requirements. The Fire Marshal and Building Inspector have indicated that any proposals would have to meet the minimum building and fire codes and would be addressed at the time of application.
There should be no infrastructure impacts of associated with this amendment.
There should be no environmental impacts associated with this amendment.
There should be no significant traffic impacts associated with this amendment.
The Capitol Region Council of Governments has reviewed this amendment as required. CRCOG reports that they have found no apparent conflict with regional plans and policies or the concerns of neighboring towns.
If this application is approved, the Commission may want to add a provision to allow some signage along the street frontage. Staff would suggest adding a signage allowance of 4 sf into Table 6.5.7.A – Signs Permitted in Single-Family Residential Districts.
The Chair asked for public comments.
Jon Uldrikis of Vincent Circle did not think that the amount of proposed parking would satisfy the needs of the facility.
Alan Witkin of Lawrence Road felt that it would be better if there were a specific proposed location.
Virginia Macro was apprehensive about opening up residential areas to increased traffic associated with the proposed facility. She was concerned that the historic elements of the older homes be retained.
Kevin Reilly expressed concern about the impact to neighboring property values and pointed out that it would be a facility, not a home.
Commissioner members raised concerns with health and ADA codes. Commissioner Foley felt that there should not be a blanket change to regulations. Commissioner Pacekonis pointed out that the criteria for health codes—a resident unable to administer their own medicine—would be a cause for concern. Commissioner Pitcock questioned the transportation and handicap needs for the facility, such as the need for a wider driveway for emergency vehicles and handicap ramps. Commissioner Marrero asked if the applicants would be able to get a gauge of concern from neighboring properties. Commissioner Kennedy inquired about similar types of facilities in other towns.
Chuck responded that the State Department of Health licenses these facilities and sets the parameters under which an individual can qualify as a resident. If the health status of an individual changes and they no longer can care for themselves, they may have to find alternative housing. There are also a number of regulations that they would have to comply with related to building and fire codes.
Chuck stated they have visit a number of facilities around the state, however many of them were built under the old Health Codes, found in more urbanized areas and are not similar to what type of facility they hope to open. The want to have a more rural setting and have the house blend in with the surrounding neighborhood. They did not want to be an impact on their neighbors.
Commissioner Pacekonis questioned the zoning process. Lipe stated that by permitting the use by special exception, the special exception criteria would be used to evaluate each individual application.
The Commission discussed the types of road these facilities would be permitted under this proposal and questioned the impact such a proposal would have in a dense, residential neighborhood.
Hebbe responded they want to have a more rural setting for their facility and have the house blend in with the surrounding properties. They do not want to have a negative impact on their neighbors and don’t feel the amount of traffic generated would be of concern.
The public hearing was closed at 8:55PM
NEW BUSINESS:
Discussion/Decision/Action regarding the following:
- Appl 11-22P, Neary Site Plan Modification – request for a site plan modification for the location of the house on an approved interior lot on property to the rear of 1576 Main Street, A-40 zone
Greg Neary was present to discuss the application.
Lipe provided a Planning Department report.
Request for approval of a site plan modification for the location of the proposed house on 2.39 acre property located to the rear of 1546 Main Street (easterly side of Main Street, south of Oxbow Lane), A-40 zone.
The proposed lot is completely wooded, with evergreen trees in the area where the new house is proposed and primarily deciduous trees on the remainder of the lot. The new proposed house appears to be located in the area that will least impact the existing houses on all sides of the proposed lot as the adjoining neighbor to the north has an area of thick evergreen trees along the lot boundary.
The existing house has two driveways, one of which is a circular drive. The driveway for the interior lot is proposed to be a 15’ wide drive that connects to the southern portion of the existing driveway. The circular drive will be eliminated with this proposal.
The location of the new house and existing house are within the historic district; the architectural for the new house and any modifications to the existing house will be subject to historic district review and approval.
The interior lot will be serviced by town sewers and a well. WPCA approval is has been granted.
The Fire Marshal has reviewed this lot and is satisfied with the driveway as proposed.
There are no regulated wetlands and there is no 100-year floodplain on this lot.
If this application is approved, the Planning Dept. has no requested approval modifications. We do note that in the event the applicant wants to relocate either the drive or the house in the future, a modification would need to be approved by this Commission.
Public Comment
Ginny Macro from the Historic District commented that if the house were located in the Historic District it would be subject to their review.
Commissioner Pitcock questioned the location of the house as it related to the historic district.
Lipe responded the location as shown is within the Historic District.
Commissioner Pacekonis made a motion to approve the application with the following modifications:
Drainage and construction for this lot is subject to the approval of the Town Engineer.
The lot shall be serviced by the Town of South Windsor sanitary sewer system and are subject to the approval of the Water Pollution Control Authority prior to filing of mylars and issuance of building permits.
Water shall be supplied to this lot by well.
All plans used in the field by the developer must bear the stamp and authorized signature of the Town of South Windsor.
Footing drains are required for the house. Prior to the building of any structure on a lot, a topographic map, drawn to a scale of 1" = 40', shall be submitted, showing proposed contours, elevations and the location of the footing drains. No building permit will be issued until the proposed contours, floor elevations and location of footing drains have been approved by the Town Engineer.
If, for any reason, finished grading and other site work is not completed, the Town Engineer shall determine the amount of a cash bond to ensure final grading and site work. This cash bond must be submitted prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
No building permits will be issued until all modifications have been complied with, and the final plans have been filed in the Town Clerk's office.
An as-built plan is required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy per Section 91.2.B of the zoning regulations.
The approved locations of the house, garage and driveway are an integral part of this special exception in order to preserve existing trees. If modifications are proposed subsequent to this approval, the structures will not be allowed to encroach any closer to the north property boundary without Commission approval.
Commissioner B. Kuehnel seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously.
- Appl 11-21P, Jon Chuck and Noah Webb – (Chuck Zoning amendment) – request to amend the zoning regulations to add “Residential Care Home (Facility)” to Table 3.1.1.A Residential Zones as a special exception use in RR and A-40 zones; to add same use to Article 10 Definitions, and add Section 7.20 Residential Care Home (Facility)
The Commission discussed the proposal. It was clarified that this use was being proposed as a special exception use. When/if a regulation were adopted, then the applicant would have to return with an application for a specific site.
The Commission expressed some concern where these types of facilities might be located and the possible impacts it might have on existing neighborhoods. The Commission talked about possible changes to the proposed regulation criteria that would protect the residential character of the area.
No action was taken on the item.
- Preliminary discussion with Craig Kochanski regarding possible Senior Residence Development off of Lawrence Road (see documents included)
Craig Kochanski approached the Commission about raising the current 250 unit cap currently in the regulations and also discussed the concept plan for a SRD proposal on the westerly side of Lawrence Road.
The Commission indicated they would be receptive to entertaining an application to raise the cap. Any new SRD proposal would be evaluated in accordance with the Special Exception criteria in the regulations.
Commissioner Pacekonis made a motion to extend the meeting after 10:00 PM; Commissioner D. Sorenson seconded the motion and passed unanimously.
- Discussion with Planimetrics regarding the Scope of Services for the Town Plan of Conservation and Development Update
Heidi Samokar from Planimetrics reviewed the Scope of Services. The Commission requested minor changes. Ms. Samokar indicated that she would forward those changes and a contract to the town for consideration.
BONDS: None
MINUTES:
7/26/11 were adopted by consensus with minor revisions.
OTHER BUSINESS: None
CORRESPONDENCE/REPORTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
Commissioner D. Sorenson made a motion to adjourn at 10:58 PM. Commissioner G. Pitcock seconded.
The motion carried unanimously
Respectfully Submitted:
pzc approved on 9-13-11
Michele R. Lipe
Town Planner
| 
