TOWN OF WILLINGTON
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 16, 2002 REGULAR MEETING
A. Call to Order
St. Louis called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. at the Town office Building, 40 Old Farms Road, Willington, CT.
B. & C. Roll Call/Seat Alternates
Members Present: A. St. Louis, Chairman
R. Tulis, Vice-Chairman
S. Trueb, Secretary
N. Gray
D. Lytwynn (arrived 7:43 p.m.)
T. Radell
Members Absent: M. Ellis (alt.)
W. Goodale (alt.)
P. Nevers
D. Palumbo (alt.)
Also Present: S. Yorgensen, Planning-Zoning Agent
S. Nimerowski, Recording Clerk
No alternates were seated.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. File #2002-26 – Application for Special Permits for two (2) Rear Lots located at 47
Eldredge Mills Road (Map 28, Lot 001, 9.60 acres). Elfreide Skorupski owner/
Thomas Levitt applicant. (Received on 6/4/02, Hearing on 7/16/02, Decision by
10/01/02.)
Ralph Mazzarella spoke, saying he was working for Mr. Levitt, the applicant. He introduced Mr. Levitt’s attorney, Atty. David Marder. He said that the site is located at the end of a paved section of road, on the left or westerly side. He said there is approximately 150 feet of paved, town-maintained road in the front of the property; the balance of the frontage (a little less than 400 ft.) is on the unpaved portion of Eldredge Mills Road which has not been formally abandoned and is maintained by the town of Willington. Elfreide Skorupski owns this parcel. Mr. Mazzarella gave a history of the property, including past boundary line disputes. He said engineering work has been done by Peter Perizo, Engineer and Surveyor; there is a current survey. Mrs. Skorupski is the owner of
16 acres constituted by two parcels, and the land has never been subdivided. He said the applicant is asking for a special permit for two rear lots. He said that a special permit for one rear lot only was sought, and Gary Jones, Assistant Agent, told him that we conformed to the road frontage requirements. Mr. Mazzarella said the Commission then asked for the status of the road. He said he met with Mr. Patten, First Selectman. Mr. Patten said the road has not been formally abandoned, and Mr. Patten should be submitting a letter to the Land Use Office stating this fact. He said the application and map have now been revised to reflect two rear lots. He said the two proposed raised ranches would have 46 x 24 ft. foundations, with garages beneath the houses. He said when the soil was tested in April, the Town Sanitarian was present as well as a representative from the Eastern Highland District, and a letter in the file indicates soil
conditions are suitable for the dwellings. Mr. Mazzarella said the small amount of wetlands is at least 140 ft. from any proposed activity. He said at one time a well was located in the wetlands and will be filled in. He said the location of the new driveway will be moved approximately 10 ft., to align with the front of the new proposed house. He indicated that the second parcel is truly a rear lot. He said the 200 ft. driveway will have a 50 ft. setback, which is 25 more than regulations require. He said the soil was tested
and conforms to necessary requirements, and that both lots are designed engineering sites. He said at the time of testing, extra holes were dug to make sure there was no buried debris, which there was not. He said that each lot is serviced by its own drilled well. Mr. Mazzarella said they hoped to minimize the amount of trees removed. He gave details of construction, saying that 2” x 6” construction would be used and the modern energy code followed. He said a 10 x 8 deck for each house is proposed.
Atty. David Marder added several comments.
Tulis had several questions. He asked about drainage issues, to which Mr. Mazzarella replied that swales would be used. Tulis asked what provision would be made if a school bus needed to turn around at the end of the road, and Mr. Mazzarella replied that he could amend the plans to have a section paved and give an easement for a turn-around. Tulis said that any prospective purchaser of that lot would need to know about this, and Mr. Mazzarella agreed. He said that Atty. Marder indicated an encumbrance could be put on the property.
Atty. Marder reiterated Mr. Mazzarella’ comments. He added that concerning the issue of whether a subdivision has been done in the past, they have an affidavit dated May 28, 2002 from Patricia Johnson-Harding stating that the two tracts have never been combined into one lot. Atty. Marder said that the letter from John Patten, First Selectman, stated the road has not been formally abandoned, that the road is still a town road, and assured the Commission that the final configuration will provide for turn-arounds within the property so emergency vehicles can have access. He said no wetlands will be disturbed and that the perc test was certificated accurate and the septic systems suitable. He said the properties and proposed houses locations were staked. He said a boundary line agreement
has been on the record for a long time with Fox; there has been no dispute on the other side with Evelyn Parizek.
St. Louis listed several letters and memos present in the file, commenting that a letter from First Selectman Patten hadn’t been received as yet.
Evelyn Parizek of 248 Tolland Turnpike, an abutting property owner, stated she had reviewed the applicant’s map and that it was in accordance with her own A-2 survey. She said she had no objection to development of this land. She said that concerning the well that would be filled in, it was her understanding that it was a spring and not a dug well.
Diane Becker of 186 Tolland Turnpike spoke on behalf of Becker Construction Company, saying they have a working sand and gravel pit on the other side of the property, and wanted this fact to be added to the plans. She said she didn’t want people to move into the proposed houses and then complain about the noise. She also suggested that the new property owners put up “No Trespassing” signs facing the Becker property.
A brief discussion ensued concerning this request. Atty. Marder said he had no objection to annotating the map, but that the Becker Construction Company should put up “No Trespassing” signs if they wanted to do so.
Thomas Fox, of 39 Eldredge Mills Road, said he sent a letter to the Commission about his concerns of insufficient frontage along the parcel. He said that beyond the paved section of road, all that’s left is a washed-out former dirt road. He asked where the public road ends. He said he objected to the fact that two driveways were proposed along the northern boundary line with no required buffer. Mr. Fox then gave a history of his unsuccessful requests for a subdivision of his own property. He said he thought it would be unfair if Mr. Levitt gets permission for rear lots. He asked if a cul-de-sac should be required for the proposed subdivision. He also said that he didn’t know Mr. Patten was a part of the zoning process, to which St. Louis replied that the First
Selectman is in charge of roads. St. Louis said that Mr. Patten was contacted concerning present or future plans for Eldredge Mills Road.
Yorgensen asked Mr. Mazzarella what the frontage was, and he replied 300 ft.
Tulis asked Mr. Fox if he had ever filed a formal application for rear lot approval, and Mr. Fox replied no, that he was discouraged from doing so by Sue Yorgensen at that time.
Yorgensen said that different regulations and criteria are in place now, and that rear lots are allowed by special permits.
St. Louis asked Mr. Mazzarella if this application would land-lock any land, and he replied no, only if the town formally abandons the end of Eldredge Mills Road. St. Louis asked if there was access for all abutters, and Mr. Mazzarella replied yes. St. Louis indicated there was a lot of material to review and the Public Hearing couldn’t be closed tonight. He said a engineer, possibly the Town Engineer, should get together with the road foreman to see where the pavement ends and give the impact of the proposed plans.
Yorgensen said that would be required, and Tulis said it would be to the applicant’s benefit to do so anyway.
Yorgensen asked if this was one parcel being divided into two, or two lots. Atty. Marder said there was one deed with two tracts. Yorgensen said she wanted to ask Mr. Patten if the dirt road section of Eldredge Mills Road was ever formally accepted as a street, and also to have the Fire Department review plans. She said that in the past we had a similar situation, and one of the requirements we made at that time is that an adequate turnaround (a hammerhead) had to be provided on town property. She said a piece of the property was deeded to the town. She said that because of homeowner liability, it is not a good idea to have public vehicles on private property.
MOTION: To continue public hearing on File #2002-06 to August 20, 2002.
By: Trueb Seconded: Radell
Result: Motion passes unanimously.
D. New Business
1. File #2002-32 – Application for a (1) Lot Re-Subdivision of a portion of the property
of John Blessington located at east side of Mason Road and south side of Cowles
Road (Map 10, Lot 60, 68.5 acres). John Blessington, Owner/Applicant. (Received
on 7/16/02, Hearing by 8/20/02, Decision by 10/15/02.)
Mr. Blessington and Hank Torcellini, P.E., were present. Mr. Blessington asked for a definition of a re-subdivision. He said he felt very strongly that his request was for a subdivision, not a re-subdivision. Agent Yorgensen explained the difference between the terms. She explained that state regulations require a public hearing for a re-subdivision, but it has been the practice of the Commission to require one for a subdivision also. St. Louis asked if the applicant was asking the Commission to set aside the staff’s opinion that that this is a re-subdivision, and then asked the applicant if he was asking the Commission to override the staff’s practice of having public hearings for subdivisions, and the applicant replied yes to both questions. Mr. Blessington stressed
that his application was very cut-and-dried and wanted immediate action taken without waiting for a public hearing, but Yorgensen explained that the Commission’s practice of always having a public hearing for subdivisions eliminates charges of favoritism, and that an exception will not be made.
All present said they could be present for a public hearing on August 20, 2002.
MOTION: To set a Public Hearing on File #2002-32 for August 20, 2002.
By: Tulis Seconded: Trueb
Result: Motion passes unanimously.
E. Old Business
1. File #2002-26 – Application for Special Permits for two (2) Rear Lots located
at 47 Eldredge Mills Road (Map 28, Lot 001, 9.60 acres). Eldreide Skorupski/
owner; Thomas Levitt applicant. (Received on 6/4/02, Hearing on 7/16/02,
Decision by 10/1/02.)
The Public Hearing is still open on this application.
F. Minutes
MOTION: To approve minutes of June 18, 2002.
By: St. Louis Seconded: Trueb
Result: Motion passes 5-0-1 (Tulis abstains).
G. Correspondence
1. Letter dated 7/1/02 from the Willington Conservation Commission
re: Fenton-Ruby Park and Wildlife Preserve Park Management Plan
2. Draft and Final Draft of the Fenton-Ruby Park and Wildlife Preserve Park
Management Plan
3. Letter dated July 11, 2002 from Thomas L. Fox and Darcy A. Fox
re: Special Permit application for the approval of two (2) rear lots on the property
at 47 Eldredge Mills Road, Willington, CT.
4. Town of Willington Scenic Road Ordnance Proposal
5. Letter dated June 19, 2002 (and registration) from the Study Circles Resource Center
re: Study Circle Organizing Clinic on Friday, July 12
6. Informational sheet from CLEAR (The Center for Land use Education And Research)
7. Letter dated June 14, 2002 from the State of Connecticut Dept. of Environmental
Protection
re: Notice of Re-issuance and Issuance of General Permits for Various Inland Water
Resources Activities
8. Letter dated June 11, 2002 from the Capitol Region Council of Governments
re: Town of Tolland Report on Zoning Referral 2002/60
9. Letter dated June 11, 2002 from the Capitol Region Council of Governments
re: Town of Tolland Report on Zoning Referral 2002/64
10. Letter dated June 11, 2002 from the Capitol Region Council of Governments
re: Town of Tolland Report on Zoning Referral 2002/66
Correspondence was discussed.
H. Discussion
Several concerns were discussed.
I. Staff Report
Agent Yorgensen brought the staff up to date on several issues.
J. Adjournment
MOTION: To adjourn the meeting at 10:17 p.m.
By: Tulis Seconded: Trueb
Result: Motion passes unanimously.
Respectfully Submitted,
Susan S. Nimerowski
Recording Clerk
| 
