MEMBERS PRESENT: Patrick Kennedy, Bart Pacekonis, Mario Marrero, Elizabeth Kuehnel, Kevin Foley
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Stephanie Dexter, Will Butter
STAFF PRESENT: Jeff Folger, Senior Environmental Planner, Lauren Zarambo, Recording Secretary
APPLICATIONS TO BE OFFICIALLY RECEIVED:
- Appl. 13-04P, 1496 Realty Associates LLC - request for site plan modification to construct a 3,744 sf warehouse building on property located at 1496 John Fitch Boulevard, Industrial zone
- Appl. 13-05P, AMOUN PITA – request for site plan approval to utilize a 5,000 sf building for a wholesale bakery and distribution, on property located at 361 Pleasant Valley Road, Industrial zone
REGULAR MEETING / MADDEN ROOM
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Patrick Kennedy called the Regular Meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None
NEW BUSINESS: Discussion/Decision/Action regarding the following:
- Plan of Conservation and Development – meeting with Planimetrics consultant Heidi Samokar to review draft plan (previously distributed to the Commission)
Heidi Samokar continued the review of the draft with a goal to get through the balance of the material in the meeting by going forward through the material from page 45 onward.
Starting with Chapter 8, Business Development, Ms Samokar stated Planner Lipe has suggested using a photo of Evergreen Walk for the backdrop photo on page 45. Commissioner Butter commented the phrase ‘Business Zoning Districts’ in the first bullet under Strategies is used where in other sections ‘Business Zones’ is used. The Commission agreed the use of ‘Business Zones’ is most typical and should be used consistently.
Changes will be made to the map on page 47 which is based on a zoning layout. Planner Lipe identified housing developments within some zones. Ms Samokar will confirm the land use with zoning so the adjustment can reflect present day land use. Another map adjustment will be made to the Cross Road Nodes on Route 5 to remove the northern most node and add it to the next intersection south. Commissioners Butter and Marrero brought up the newly created Travel Services (TS) zone for signalized intersections on Route 5 suggesting its inclusion in the third bullet of the list on page 46.
Vice Chairman Pacekonis noted the prior POCD focused on the areas of Evergreen Walk, Buckland Road and 291 as economic development areas where the draft’s writing does not stress this. Ms Samokar stated after the last plan was developed the regulations were updated to reinforce the plan and asked going forward what is the strategy for those areas. Chairman Kennedy bought up the Buckland Gateway Development Zone. Ms. Samokar suggested adding a sidebar for listing zones which have been created over the last ten years. The 291-Corridor Development Zone and the Buckland Gateway Zone (which includes Evergreen Walk) were important initiatives. As a result, the town has seen the desired results and should continue to support development in these zones. The Commission agreed. Chairman Kennedy noted the Buckland
Gateway Zone has come quite a ways since the last plan, but I-291 Corridor Development has not seen as much development. Ms Samokar stated the framework has been set for the development the town is looking for.
Goals and Strategies are listed for South Windsor Center in Chapter 9 with a sidebar of residents’ comments. The Planner wants to adjust the Town Center boundary on the map on page 52. Senior Environmental Planner, Jeff Folger, pointed out the map’s blue line at Ellington Road and Sullivan Avenue which does not encompass the entire parcel and will need to be extended further to the east.
Vice Chairman Pacekonis asked for an explanation of the first bullet on page 53 which concerns outdoor dining restrictions. Ms Samokar stated there is presently a blanket restriction for outdoor dining on town owned land. Although it is not a subject that comes up very often, Ms Samokar asked why make it a zoning issue on something the Town Council can handle. The decision was made to move the item to the end of the bullet list to decrease the importance of the topic.
The map on page 54 was created in Word and will be replaced with a better graphic from GIS like that on page 57. Vice Chairman Pacekonis asked about the emphasis on development on only one side of the street for South Windsor Center. Ms Samokar asked if there is any developable land in that area. Mr. Folger stated the area in question will have an assisted living facility starting in the fall which will be built side by side the other assisted living facility. Chairman Kennedy stated the Buckland Gateway Zone goes to Route 30 on the eastern side. Ms Samokar asked if the boundary should be extended. Commissioner Kennedy stated if it is mostly wetlands and undevelopable it may not be worth changing.
A list of principles of redevelopment is shown on page 56 anticipating a time when property owners in the center may want to redevelop. This list conveys a vision for longer term redevelopment which may or may not happen in 20 years. The Town has no control over private property but the Plan can express the vision and lay out what the town is willing to do to help convince land owners to also aspire to this vision. If zoning is friendlier twenty or thirty years from now who knows what may be possible. Setbacks and parking are the greatest challenges. Chairman Kennedy projected a time when there may be common parking areas with shuttle buses connecting areas as long as regulations do not get in the way.
Vice Chairman Pacekonis asked for an example of ‘Coordinated development with greater intensity than currently allowed in pedestrian friendly village setting’ from the chart on page 57. Ms Samokar described the potential of a new main street developing, indicated by the yellow line on the map, with new buildings facing each other on a new main street. This would require reconfiguration of the parking. She asked for a better word if the word ‘intensity’ is vague or far reaching. Ms Samokar suggested ‘flexibility’ to which all agreed. Commissioner Butter suggested using the word ‘might’ rather than ‘should’ in the second column on page 56.
Chapter 10 mirrors what has been previously discussed about Route 5. Chairman Kennedy noticed the second bullet under ‘Strategies’ used ‘Cross Road Nodes’ and remarked about the grainy quality of the photograph on page 60. A better photo will be found of a good overhead shot or second choice can be one from street level. The newly created Travel Service (TS) zone was discussed.
Planner Lipe had asked Ms Samokar to reiterate access management does exist along Route 5 in the zoning regulations. There are two different concepts. Zoning regulations require access management to be worked out when applying for applications. An access management plan will look at every single driveway along Route 5 and make recommendations for closing or consolidation. Vice Chairman Pacekonis asked if the sentence on the right column of page 61 that some communities have created access management plans will be reworded. Ms Samokar stated South Windsor has adopted zoning regulations with access management, but South Windsor does not have an actual access management plan.
Commissioner Butter suggested adding the word ‘aesthetic’ to the last sentence on page 61 about the DOT upgrade of guard rails. Commissioner Marrero stated having been a long time DOT employee he witnessed a time approximately fifteen years ago when complaints had been made about the amount of signs, especially political signs, on the state right of way on Route 5. There are regulations restricting any signs, especially commercial signs, within the state right of way. As a result of complaints action was taken and the majority of the signs were systematically removed. Over time the signs have come back. The Commissioner suggested taking care in the verbiage used in the plan and he stated there are no grandfathered commercial signs allowed on the right of way - only regulatory warning signs from the
state or small directional signs for religious groups. Ms Samokar stated the Planner will be researching whether there are any valid permits for commercial signs from DOT. Ms Samokar will rework the wording on page 61 to be toned down to use phrasing such as ‘research may indicate’ or ‘it is possible’ and add ‘illegal commercial signs’. She stated national case law says there can be no differentiation based on content. The State cannot agree to have signs for churches and not for something else. Commissioner Marrero stated there are state regulations which allow for church signage on state right of ways. Ms Samokar concluded businesses depend on signs for their success, so it is a matter of finding an acceptable solution for commercial signage.
Page 62 concerns ‘Yards and Buildings’. Ms Samokar stated the yards and their landscaping can matter more than the buildings. The following two pages of the plan will be filled with photographs of examples of good signs and good landscaping to convey the idea and to show it can be done.
In Chapter 11, ‘Residential Development’, on page 66 the Town Planner had a suggestion to add a bullet to the list to monitor the town if it becomes influenced by the residential tear down trend. Now and in ten years it may not be the issue it is today in other CT communities but may be worth monitoring. The commissioners concluded it is not presently an issue in South Windsor and will revisit the topic in ten years. Commissioner Butter pointed out the reference to page 72 in the last bullet under ‘Protect Established Neighborhoods’ was not referenced correctly and suggested using the phrase ‘as needed’ or ‘as warranted’ instead.
On page 66, a soft approach on ‘Allow Flexibility in Meeting Emerging Housing Preferences’ has been taken offering concepts to stay on the radar. The Planner made a change in the text for ‘Encouraging Additional Affordable Elderly Housing’ from ‘The Housing Authority will be building 40 units’ to ‘hopes to build 40 units’.
The map on page 68 shows the zoning patterns under current zoning regulations and the rural preservation areas where open space development might be mandated. The map will also be amended to change other minor incongruities and locate all Senior Residence Developments.
Ms Samokar used criteria from a technical analysis of transportation which might guide housing development aligned with economic development goals to create mixed use targeted areas near commercial on arterial roads. Vice Chairman Pacekonis and Commissioner Butter noted the area on 194 may be getting into the industrial area. Ms Samokar will edit the areas so they are pulled back from industrial zones and make the map more generalized rather than showing specific areas.
Vice Chairman Pacekonis submitted a copy of an email from Robert Dickenson to Ms Samokar concerning bike lanes, bike paths and sidewalks particularly noting sidewalk multi use bike paths or bike lanes were not indicated for Sullivan Avenue up to Route 5. Ms Samokar noted this correspondence was a different one from an email received from resident Ginny Hole. The Vice Chair encouraged more use of bike paths and sidewalks along major thorough fares for safe passage and added the word ‘safely’ to the sentence ‘Pedestrians and bicyclists have more opportunities to get around South Windsor.’ under Goals on page 69.
Concerning the Transportation Plan on page 71 Senior Environmental Planner Folger referred to comments from town engineer who recommended downgrading the collector intensity from I-291 south on Main Street. The culvert which serves the Podunk River in that area will have to be changed in the future and if it is a major collector we will be ineligible for federal funding. Ms Samokar thought it may have to be changed further up. Chairman Kennedy suggested Chapel Road as the first major area and to have it changed to ‘local’. Commissioner Marrero stated it will be state maps that will be used to determine the urban collectors and it will be a process to change anything on those maps. Chairman Kennedy asked if funding eligibility goes by the official DOT plan. Ms Samokar stated it does, but not to have anything
on a plan to refute local interests. Chairman Kennedy suggested calling Main Street a local road up to Chapel Road.
Concerning page 70, ‘Minimize Congestion’, Vice Chairman Pacekonis asked about the idea of where certain complexes should be located using the example of Pleasant Hills which is located on a small local road but dumps into a minor arterial road and Pleasant Valley Road. In the future if a complex is developed based on the POCD would it have to be on the Pleasant Valley Road versus Wheeler Road, the Vice Chair asked. Ms Samokar replied it would if the zoning regulations required it. This suggests rethinking what is allowed on a local road and then updating the zoning regulations for certain uses. The Vice Chairman and Chairman agreed changing the word ‘require’ to ‘considering requiring’.
A discussion has been added to page 72 for ‘Complete Streets’ which is technically required by state law to use 10% of towns’ road budgets to be spent on elements of Complete Streets. The Vice Chair commented adding that language does not put any pressure on public improvement standards for public works. Ms Samokar replied it becomes a budget item for Town Councils for public works and puts pressure on public works when they are designing public improvements to ask if they are making it easier for the bicyclists and pedestrians. Ideally they can look at these maps (pages 74-75) and ask if they are in an area where it is important to incorporate improvements for walking and biking.
Ms Samokar stated the South Windsor Walk and Wheel Ways Committee may want to see more in this plan incorporated from their master plan. She also noted an email received from Ginny Hole to extend sidewalks on Sullivan Avenue from West Road to Route 5. A statement from Planner Lipe that there is already a policy in place concerning cul de sacs which would not allow it was questioned by Chairman Kennedy. Ms Samokar will confer with Planner Lipe. The email from Robert Dickenson was also referenced.
Vice Chairman Pacekonis interjected having sidewalks complete is desirable. One hundred percent of school children need to be bused because there are no connections from neighborhoods to the schools. Mr. Folger brought up the Safe Routes to School Program which is under way and Ms Samokar suggested reinforcing its importance to continue that program. The Vice Chair projected opening the back of Eli Terry, Pleasant Valley and Philip R Smith schools to the neighborhoods behind each to make direct walking routes.
Commissioner Foley mentioned Vibert Road becoming part of the potential greenway. Chairman Kennedy asked if he was indicating the entire road to the boat launch becoming a greenway. The Commissioner answered just to maintain the road and that if the gravel parking lot at the Sewer Treatment Plant was in place it would be a better suited place for bird watchers and the public to congregate. Ms Samokar will work on where to fit it into the plan.
Ms Samokar suggested moving the bus and rail sections from page 76 to page 72 where they might be better placed. Senior Environmental Planner Folger asked Commissioner Marrero who owned the rail line and the right of way. Ms Samokar asked from a policy perspective does it change any of the strategies in the plan and stated she will confirm who owns the right of way but knows CT Southern Railroad owns the line.
‘Community Facilities’ changed based on the booklet that the Commission worked on. It is important to make sure the town and all departments, boards and commissions are on the same page of how each building is going to be used so there is no competition for space. When it is time for new facilities or expansion takes place, it needs to make sense for the community as a whole. The sidebar on page 78 goes over tools that can be used. The Planner has noted there are missing open space parcels to be included.
The goal for ‘Utilities’, Chapter 14, is direct and simple: ‘Utilities support desired development patterns’. Page 82 is a work in progress and will include an updated map from the Water Pollution Control Authority. Under ‘Strategies’, Commissioner Butter asked if moving wires underground as previously discussed for Route 5 was only meant to be a strategy for Route 5 or for utilities in South Windsor in general. The Commissioner also questioned whether the subject of sewer service was typically covered by zoning law. Vice Chairman Pacekonis asked about ‘Future Sewer Service’ areas indicated on the Sewer Service Map on page 83. Ms Samokar will create a sidebar for the map legend and check state statute on the wording.
The Vice Chairman asked whether the subject of the main gas lines and their location was included in the chapter. Ms Samokar stated Yankee Gas does not release maps of where their lines are located and asked what can be said, from a policy perspective, about extending gas lines. Mr. Folger suggested to ‘maximize energy options to residents of South Windsor’. Chairman Kennedy and Ms Samokar indicated it becomes an economic development issue if certain businesses cannot be attracted if utilities are not in place. She stated complaints can be made to the local gas providers and the town can also lobby the state legislature to change the law about the economic return which must be met in order to expand. Ms Samokar will add the statement ‘Maximizing energy options available to residents and
businesses’ and asked about adding a statement encouraging town wide burying of power lines. Chairman Kennedy suggested it could have its focus on Route 5 stating ‘If the priority is everything, the priority is nothing’. Commissioner Butter suggested changing the map colors on the two maps on pages 83 and 85 to differentiate between them.
Chapter 15, ‘Locational Guide Plan’, includes two separate maps; one for Conservation and one for Development. The Conservation Map on pages 88-89 is based on eight factors of conservation so that every area that has a factor gets a point and the more points an area has the darker the color on the map. This gives a rational approach for anyone who cares to develop land in the future to look at this Locational Guide Map for Conservation to see if an area has high conservation value and then find within the plan the policies for dealing with properties that have high conservation value. The Locational Guide Map for Development, pages 90-91, is based on seven criteria factors of development and demonstrates what areas are prime for development. Ms Samokar stated the darker areas on the Development Map are about
development not necessarily for ‘new’ development but primed for some kind of development. These maps are used in conjunction with all the other information within the POCD to help guide where development should go.
Vice Chairman Pacekonis pointed out conservation areas in the I-291 Corridor Development zone and referred to the draft of the Business Development Plan on page 47. Ms Samokar stated there are habitat and wetlands in the area. The Vice Chair recommended having the I-291 CD zone shaded darker because it is an area with a higher focus for development and also for the area on Sullivan Avenue near Route 5 for a stronger focus on industrial. Ms Samokar will automatically give any area zoned for commercial or industrial uses two points so they will appear darker and will calibrate the map further if necessary.
The POCD requires it to be consistent with the State Plan, State Growth Principles and the Regional Plan. The Growth Principles are solid and are addressed on page 93. The State Plan is still in draft form and will be addressed later in the process. The Regional Plan on page 94 is more of a checklist.
Under Acknowledgements, Commissioner Butter’s name is to be spelled correctly, ‘Vice Chairman’ to be added to Bart Pacekonis and ‘Chairperson’ changed to ‘Chairman’ for Patrick Kennedy.
Ms Samokar discussed PA490, a state statute which allows Assessors to assess farms, forests and open space based on how the land is used rather than its value. This allows less tax to be paid for the purpose of land preservation adding more value to the community. The State develops the criteria for forest and farms. Each community has the option of coming up with the criteria for open space. In order to have this option the plan must name the properties or list the criteria. Many communities have the policy on properties in residential zones with more than twice the amount of land required for that zone to give a reduced tax requirement for the excess land. Planner Lipe and the Assessor are researching to see if South Windsor has this policy which the State initiated in 1963 and if the Town Council approved it. Future
discussion will continue on this subject.
Going forward, an updated version of the draft will be submitted to the Planner by February 22nd along with a press release, both of which will be available for public review. In March, a public information meeting will be held at which Ms Samokar will give a brief presentation and facilitate a discussion where the public can provide their input. Two weeks later the Commission will update the draft again to create the formal draft plan proposed for adoption. This starts the statutory process. The plan is then submitted to the Town Council and to the regional planning organization and then the formal public hearing will be set. Ms Samokar is available to go before the Town Council with the same presentation she used for the public presentation if the Commission decides to use their funding and
arranges for her to do so through the Town Planner.
Ms Samokar will start working on the companion piece, ‘The Implementation Element’, which takes all the strategies from the plan to create the implementation steps. The Commission will then figure out the priorities of the steps; those of which should be taken now and what can wait five or ten years. This will then be circulated and reviewed in April with the draft plan.
Commissioner Kuehnel asked if the Commission needed to be more specific in the plan to designate Main Street as a Village District. Ms Samokar stated the Commission just needs to put the idea into the plan and that the plan needs to show that Main Street is a special enough place to warrant it. This does not obligate the town to create the district, but the plan would not have to be amended if a village district was created.
BONDS: None
MINUTES:
The Minutes of 1/22/2013 were adopted by consensus with the correction by Vice Chairman Pacekonis that a Commissioner’s time of late arrival or early departure be noted and stated his time of arrival for the 1/22/13 meeting was 7:36 p.m.
OLD BUSINESS: see page 2
OTHER BUSINESS:
CORRESPONDENCE / REPORTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
Commissioner Foley made a motion to adjourn. Vice Chairman Pacekonis seconded the motion. The motion carried and the meeting ended at 9:35 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lauren L Zarambo
| 
