TOWN OF WILLINGTON
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 5, 2000
R. TULIS CALLED A MEETING OF THE WILLINGTON PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 7:35 P.M. DECEMBER 5, 2000 AT THE TOWN OFFICE BUILDING, 40 OLD FARMS ROAD, WILLINGTON.
PRESENT: ABSENT:
R. Tulis L. Dion (exc.)
E. Kalbac D. Cushman
B. Begansky S. Kneeland
A. St. Louis W. Goodale, alt.
D. Lytwynn, alt.
S. Trueb, alt.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. File #2000-43-Application for a special permit for a gravel excavation located off Trask Road and Route 32 on 5.62 acres (Map 29, Lot 4, 31 acres). Joseph Mihaliak owner/applicant. (Received on 09/05/00, 65-day extension requested and approved, hearing on 11/21/00, continued to 12/05/00, decision by 02/06/01).
R. Heintz of Tarbell & Associates spoke on behalf of the applicant.
R. Heintz said he feels the application is basically complete and the hearing was continued to receive outstanding information from the town engineer. As a quick overview, he noted the application is considerably downsized from the point when it was previously submitted. The original disturbance was 12+ acres and now, with this plan, it is about 5 acres. The project has gone from 4 phases down to 2 phases. Originally the commission had had concerns about the soil testing done and that has all been updated. A review did find that where the excavating is now shown is the only area compatible for the gravel operation. The other areas had high ground water levels and ledge. There was also a question about the comment “to be removed” for the ledge outcrop. Joe does not care either way whether it goes or stays. It
appears to be just a peak.
R. Tulis asked about the elevation of the top of the rock as it compares to the reuse plan.
R. Heintz said with the reuse it will be 336 in that area, and existing is 436.
R. Tulis said depending on the shape, they really do not know what they have there.
R. Heintz said that is right, and it is why he said “to be removed.”
S. Yorgensen said she agrees it should be removed.
B. Begansky said he does not think the commission was in favor of it remaining. The confusion came because of the comment “to be removed” and what was said during the hearing, that it may or may not be removed.
The commission reviewed the previous minutes.
R. Heintz said it will be left as “to be removed.”
S. Yorgensen said one thing left on the checklist was a list of the types of materials to be stored.
R. Heintz said it is in the narrative that a bulldozer and an excavator will be used. He can make it more exact.
S. Yorgensen said the regulations actually call for a list of the number of each item.
J. Mihaliak said it is no problem to provide that.
S. Yorgensen asked about the reuse plan.
R. Heintz said the regulations require that the plan not leave the property inaccessible. The plans provide for the driveway maximum requirements to get up there.
S. Yorgensen asked if it was shown on the plan.
R. Heintz said the finished contours are shown.
S. Yorgensen said it is not an actual road.
R. Heintz said it is just to allow for future access.
S. Yorgensen asked about overlapping of phase 1 & 2 since the stockpile and machine storage for 2 is in 1 and 1 must be finished before 2 is started.
R. Heintz referred to the Tolland County Soils report and said this is no different than the operation on Route 320 right now. They will do all they can to clean it up but they still need a screening area.
The commission discussed options to keep the phase 1 area as restored and stabilized as possible.
R. Heintz said nothing is cast in stone, and once it is all done it will be brought to final stabilization.
The commission discussed options of moving the stockpile to minimize impact and provide a finished area.
R. Tulis said his biggest concern would be getting the stockpile away from the sedimentation basin. It does make sense to keep some of phase 1 incomplete because it is the ideal spot for the screening operation.
R. Heintz described the area.
A. St. Louis suggested possibly doing it in 3 phases and described a possible re-seeding plan.
R. Heintz said the sedimentation basin area must be taken care of first.
R. Tulis said it should be reclaimed as soon as possible. The commission is concerned about keeping it as clean as possible and getting it on its way to full stabilization even though they still have other phases to do.
A. St. Louis said the slopes would have to be stabilized. The commission was waiting for the drainage calculations from Karl.
S. Yorgensen said Karl apologized that he did not have time to review it but said there was no reason to not close the public hearing.
R. Heintz said the 18” pipe was upgraded to a 30” pipe. Karl did not have any problems with the project, he just did not get the report written.
S. Yorgensen said the report can still be received as it is a review by staff and it will not be submission of anything new.
R. Heintz stated for the record that this was a much smaller operation than was originally proposed.
R. Tulis asked for clarification on the comment “to be removed.”
S. Yorgensen said all the commission can act on is what was submitted.
R. Tulis said what was submitted said “to be removed.” He asked if there were any questions from the public.
There were none.
A. ST. LOUIS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR FILE #2000-43-APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A GRAVEL EXCAVATION LOCATED OFF TRASK ROAD AND ROUTE 32 ON 5.62 ACRES (MAP 29, LOT 4, 31 ACRES). JOSEPH MIHALIAK OWNER/APPLICANT. (RECEIVED ON 09/05/00, 65-DAY EXTENSION REQUESTED AND APPROVED, HEARING ON 11/21/00, CONTINUED TO 12/05/00, DECISION BY 02/06/01).
SECONDED BY B. BEGANSKY. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
2. File #2000-49-Application for a 5-lot subdivision located off Michalec Road (Map 55, Lot 1C, 28.37 acres). Joseph E. Mihaliak owner/applicant. (Received on 10/03/00, hearing on 12/05/00, decision by 02/06/01).
R. Heintz of Tarbell & Associates spoke on behalf of the applicant.
R. Heintz said this is a 5-lot subdivision on just under 30 acres on Michalec Road by the Stafford town line. He described the layout of the area and abutting properties.
Approval was granted by wetlands almost a year ago and the only field delineated spot was on Lot #4, and that was confirmed by Johnny Ianni. He highlighted the areas on the map and showed the conservation easement. Approximately 29% of the parcel is deeded to conservation easement. There are 3 road frontage lots and 2 rear lots. The 3 road frontage lots are about 80,000 square feet each and the 2 rear lots are about 11 acres and 10 acres. All the lots conform to the minimum standards for a residential house in the state of Connecticut.
R. Heintz said concerns were an increase in runoff and Karl walked the property with them. His suggestion was leakoffs on Lots 1, 2 & 3 be increased in size, and now the leakoff is into a 30’ long level spreader to dissipate the runoff. On lots 4 & 5 it was increased to an 8’ x 8’ plunge pool. The site is all wooded. He showed the limits of disturbance and the site line profile, noting that the distance for a 30mph road must be a siteline of 200 feet. On Michalec Road the speed limit is 25mph, and portions are gravel. The area with the least siteline is Lot 2 and it has about a 400-foot siteline distance. The others have an unlimited look to the north and he can say that all sitelines are met. There will be some tree clearing for construction of the driveways.
On the rear lots they need safe access and proper turnoffs for emergency vehicles, and Karl said in his memo it was acceptable. Regarding open space, they are proposing none, and they are proposing no streambelt preservation because they feel with the conservation easement and the easement along the stream it works in the same aspect.
E. Kalbac asked if this was the property site on the crest of the long hill.
R. Heintz showed the high point on the map.
E. Kalbac asked if part of it was paved.
R. Heintz reviewed the pavement beginning & ending area. It is paved to 190, and there is gravel from the top of the knoll by Potter School.
A. St. Louis asked about a sitewalk.
R. Heintz said he got a memo about a sitewalk but no one showed up except him & the applicant.
The commission determined no notices were sent out.
R. Heintz reviewed solar gain as noted in Karl’s memo. The driveways may be moved to increase it, but the layout as proposed is to provide for privacy. There is no exact location set for each house, and that may make it vary as well.
J. Mihaliak said they walked the property with the engineer & he sent a letter. He asked to have it read into the record.
R. Tulis said it was in the file, and had about 25 points noted. He said the thing bothering him is that the commission blew the sitewalk. He is not comfortable trying to evaluate the application on paper alone. He asked if they had gotten Wes Beebe’s memo.
R. Heintz said yes. In response to the other letter, a memo was written in response and probably 15 of the items are just stating what was done on the plans. He reviewed the info.
The commission reviewed the letters and responses.
R. Heintz noted that they are giving almost a 32% conservation easement, higher than he had previously mentioned.
The commission discussed the drainage issues.
R. Heintz noted there basically is no study in downstream area that they an relate to. He reviewed the flows.
The commission reviewed the subdivision regulations.
S. Yorgensen reviewed the road improvement requirements.
R. Heintz said he does not see the great amount of runoff that Wes mentioned.
S. Yorgensen said she asked Wes about that and he showed the area of concern. Karl thinks one thing here, and Wes thinks another, and the regulations allow for several options.
R. Heintz said he believes they have addressed all of Karl’s comments.
S. Yorgensen asked if they were planning engineered systems.
R. Heintz said all the lots would be engineered systems.
S. Yorgensen asked for clarification of the parcel history map.
R. Heintz said it was cut out of 97 acres in 1846.
S. Yorgensen said her only other concerns were minor technical revisions.
The commission discussed keeping the hearing open.
J. Mihaliak said he agreed a sitewalk should be done.
A. St. Louis asked if there were any waivers.
S. Yorgensen said the only one required is for the road profiles, because there are no roads.
The commission scheduled as sitewalk for Sunday December 10 at 9 a.m.
S. Yorgensen asked if the driveways and test pits were staked.
R. Heintz said Yes, but the house sites are not. He reviewed the maps.
S. TRUEB MOVED TO CONTINUE UNTIL JANUARY 16, 2000 THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR FILE #2000-49-APPLICATION FOR A 5-LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED OFF MICHALEC ROAD (MAP 55, LOT 1C, 28.37 ACRES). JOSEPH E. MIHALIAK OWNER/APPLICANT. (RECEIVED ON 10/03/00, HEARING ON 12/05/00, DECISION BY 02/06/01).
SECONDED BY R. TULIS. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
R. Heintz stated he would mail an extension request letter to staff.
R. TULIS CALLED THE REGULAR MEETING TO ORDER AT 8:57 P.M.
Same members seated as above.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. File #2000-58-Application for a logging permit located south of Route 74 and north of Meadow Lane (Map 16, 39, Map 21, Lot 22, 150 acres). Arthur Godbout, owner/Dan Donahue, Natural Resources Consultants, applicant. (Received on 12/05/00, hearing or decision by 02/06/01).
D. Donahue said the maps and info are all in the file.
S. Yorgensen said a forestry plan is in existence for this property.
D. Donahue submitted a copy of the plan. He said this property intersects the Ashford/Willington town line.
S. Yorgensen asked where the access goes.
D. Donahue said there are 2 log landing sites, one by Meadow Lane and one off Route 74 by the beg read farmhouse. Log landing #1 will have about 80-90% of the volume. Log landing #2 is there to avoid a major watercourse and the need to have a wetlands crossing there. He has been managing the property for 13 years and it is all flagged. All the trails have been used before. He reviewed the different markings. The landing sites were used before and an IWWC permit has been given. Regarding the restoration schedule, it s a one-year contract. Restoration will begin in the spring or fall.
S. Trueb asked the number of houses on the lane.
D. Donahue said it is about 12.
S. Trueb asked if work would be in the daytime.
D. Donahue said it will be a forwarder/skidder operation. Traffic is limited to transport on the forwarder as opposed to being dragged out. The neighbors have been notified and the receipts are in the file. There is really only one residence anywhere near where they will be, and they will be about 150 feet away from that. No trees will fall over the boundaries. He will supervise the harvest and respects the landowners.
S. Trueb asked who was doing the harvesting.
D. Donahue said it is Native American Hardwood Corporation.
R. Tulis asked the number of loads.
D. Donahue said it is about 140,000 board feet and about 50 loads.
R. Tulis asked the timeframe.
D. Donahue said once they start, it should be about 6-8 weeks.
R. Tulis said that will be 1-2 loads per day.
D. Donahue reviewed the procedure and said there is not a lot of traffic.
R. Tulis said he was asking because on a street like Meadow Lane it is curvy and narrow, and he is anticipating some people may get a little upset.
D. Donahue said chances are most people would be at work while they were logging and will not know anything is going on.
S. Yorgensen asked about Gary’s note regarding restoration of the skid trails.
D. Donahue said they will not need it. The log landing sites will be leveled, re-graded and re-seeded. The trails being used are re-vegetated now and will probably not need restoration per se. It is stated in the contract that if there is rutting, it gets restored.
A. ST. LOUIS MOVED TO APPROVE FILE #2000-58-APPLICATION FOR A LOGGING PERMIT LOCATED SOUTH OF ROUTE 74 AND NORTH OF MEADOW LANE (MAP 16, 39, MAP 21, LOT 22, 150 ACRES). ARTHUR GODBOUT, OWNER/DAN DONAHUE, NATURAL RESOURCES CONSULTANTS, APPLICANT. (RECEIVED ON 12/05/00, HEARING OR DECISION BY 02/06/01), WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
1) THAT DAN DONAHUE WILL BE OVERSEER OF THE OPERATION.
SECONDED BY D. LYTWYNN. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
2. File #2000-57-Amendements to zoning regulations. (Public Hearing on 01/16/01).
OLD BUSINESS:
1. File #2000-47-Application for a special permit for a daycare center at 215 River Road in a R-80 zone. Kids Express Learning & Daycare applicants/Cheryl York & Barbara Meredith, owners. (Received on 09/19/00, hearing on 11/21/00, decision by 01/16/01).
S. Yorgensen said the new regulation is in effect and this application meets it.
B. Beganksy said there are no hoops left for them to jump through.
D. LYTWYNN MOVED TO APPROVE FILE #2000-47-APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A DAYCARE CENTER AT 215 RIVER ROAD IN A R-80 ZONE. KIDS EXPRESS LEARNING & DAYCARE APPLICANTS/CHERYL YORK & BARBARA MEREDITH, OWNERS. (RECEIVED ON 09/19/00, HEAIONG ON 11/21/00, DECISION BY 01/16/01), WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1) the facility must meet town regulations
2) the facility must meet state regulations
3) the permit shall be annually renewable
SECONDED BY S. TRUEB.
YES: E. Kalbac, B. Begansky, A. St. Louis, D. Lytwynn, S. Trueb
ABSTAIN: R. Tulis
2. File #2000-43-Application for a special permit for a gravel excavation located off Trask Road and Route 32 on 5.62 acres (Map 29, Lot 4, 31 acres). Joseph Mihaliak owner/applicant. (Received on 09/05/00, 65-day extension requested and approved, hearing on 11/21/00, continued to 12/05/00, decision by 02/06/01).
Discussion deferred.
MINUTES:
S. TRUEB MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF 11/21/00 AS AMENDED.
SECONDED BY A. ST. LOUIS.
YES: E. Kalbac, B. Begansky, A. St. Louis, D. Lytwynn, S. Trueb
ABSTAIN: R. Tulis
CORRESPONDENCE:
None.
DISCUSSION:
Deferred.
STAFF REPORT:
S. Yorgensen said Village Springs is looking for clarification regarding the condition on their permit which says no higher than 40 feet and how it affects the railing and safety ladder. They feel to stay within the 40 feet they will have to slice the railing.
The commission concurred that the railing needs to be left in tact and the entire structure be lowered so it stays within 40 feet.
S. Yorgensen said there is an application for a truckwash but at this time a lot of information is missing. Though it is not on the agenda, it is technically received tonight. It was faxed over with the application only and no other information. There are no originals and no check and nothing submitted. George will have to look through the old files for information submitted previously.
PLAN OF CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT:
The commission discussed having those who submitted proposals come in for interviews.
A. St. Louis said the commission cannot approve something it does not have funds for.
The commission reviewed the plans and discussed costs.
Sue will set up a workshop to review the applicants and proposals.
S. TRUEB MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:53 P.M.
SECONDED BY B. BEGANSKY. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
| 
