TOWN OF WILLINGTON
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MAY 6, 2003 MEETING
A. Call to Order
St. Louis called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m.
B. Roll Call
Members Present: A. St. Louis, Chairman
R. Tulis, Vice-Chairman
M. Ellis (alt.)
N. Gray
D. Lytwyn
P. Nevers
T. Radell
S. Trueb
Members Absent: W. Goodale (alt.)
Also Present: S. Yorgensen, Planning-Zoning Agent
S. Nimerowski, Recording Clerk
C. Seat Alternates
No alternates were seated.
PUBLIC HEARING
· File #2003-16 – Application for Zoning Regular Changes to Section 11.19 regarding campgrounds. Applicant: KMC, LLC. (Received 4/1/2003; Public Hearing 5/6/2003; Decision by 7/1/2003.)
Tulis stated that his wife works for Atty. Capossela’s office, but not directly for Atty. Capossela. St. Louis said this would be acceptable as long as Tulis could be impartial.
Atty. Capossela referred to a letter dated May 5, 2003 from Branse & Willis, LLC, legal counsel for the town of Willington, to Mr. Al St. Louis, Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission. He said that KMC, LLC (Ray Crossen) owns and operates the former Rainbow Acres Campground, now known as Wilderness Lake. He said all prior campers have been removed, and that Mr. Crossen has made substantial improvements to the facilities. He said the owner is attempting to have an upscale campground and recreational facility. The idea is to allow the owner to accomplish what he would like to as well as to protect the town’s interests.
Atty. Capossela said the first change proposed is buffering. The 200 ft. setback from the property line creates a problem because of the way the property was acquired. Atty. Capossela asked for 200 ft. from the zone line instead. He proposed the following alternative wording for 11.19.02, Buffering: “No campsite, or building or structure used for active recreational purposes, shall be located less than two hundred (200’) feet from any property line. Such buffer area shall be suitably landscaped to provide an all-season screen. Existing vegetation may be used or augmented to meet this requirement, at the discretion of the Commission. The Commission may, at its discretion, reduce the buffer area to no less than fifty (50’) from any property line if it finds that existing
site conditions, topography or landscaping will provide adequate buffering for adjacent buildings or uses.” He said this language, if adopted, will use natural features for buffering. Atty. Capossela showed the zone change map that has been submitted, although the zone change was not being requested tonight. He said that if this alternate proposal was adopted, setbacks would be measured from the property line. He said that Atty. Branse has not seen this proposed change in wording to 11.19.02.
Atty. Capossela said that concerning Section 11.19.06, Occupancy, their proposal extends the camping season in the spring and in the fall. March 1 to November 30 is proposed. He said that in addition, it would allow year-round camping; however, during the December 1-February 28 period, no one would stay more than 14 continuous nights. He said that the applicant is proposing winter activities. Atty. Capossela said that affidavits could be given as needed. He said he disagreed with some of Atty. Branse’s comments concerning the legality of the “no residency” provision.
St. Louis asked Mr. Capossela what portion of the campground Mr. Crossen would like to use year-around, and Mr. Crossen replied the pine grove area next to the rec area. He said that a register book has to be maintained by state law and kept on-site. Atty. Capossela asked Mr. Crossen if the utilities could be turned off in the other areas, and Mr. Crossen replied yes, that there are 4 separate meters. Mr. Crossen said there are 20 sites in the pine grove as well as 5 tent sites.
Gray asked if the record keeping would be enough to legally prove non-occupancy, and Atty. Capossela replied he didn’t know.
Atty. Capossela said he was willing to work with either the Land Use Department or directly with Atty. Branse.
Gray asked about the logic of “14 days” or “no more than 4 days of any week.” Atty. Capossela said either wording was somewhat arbitrary. Tulis asked if during the winter months the campground could be closed during the week and only be open for weekends, and Mr. Crossen replied that after the holidays they only really want the holiday weekends.
Yorgensen asked about maintaining a registry book and where the regulation came from, the state health code or camp regulations, and Mr. Crossen replied from the public health code. Gray read the regulation out loud. A brief discussion followed.
Tulis asked Mr. Crossen if he could kill power to the sites for 3 days/week if regulations stated he had to close during that time, and Mr. Crossen said it would be no problem.
Section 11.19.08, Campsites – Atty. Capossela said he had added new proposed language to this section. He said that Atty. Branse had strong feelings about this. Yorgensen said that regulation 11.19.07 limits size. Mr. Crossen explained the difference between a trailer and a park model. Atty. Capossela said that 36 x 8.6 is the current limitations, that under the current limitations a park model couldn’t be put into the campground. He said that they were not asking for any change in this regulation tonight. St. Louis said the term “recreational vehicles” should be clarified. Discussion. St. Louis said he didn’t like the idea of having to allow something that had to be towed by a special vehicle. Mr. Crossen indicated that the term
“Park Model” could be removed. Tulis said he questioned the 24-hour requirements for breakdown and removal, but said he thought 4 hours was fine. Mr. Crossen said he was okay with the 4-hour requirement. Tulis suggested not using the word “structure.” Atty. Capossela said it should be made clear that it must be portable.
Section 11.29.18, Manager’s Dwellings – Atty. Capossela said that Atty. Branse’s comments were incorrect, that Joe Halchek, the former owner of the campground, did not live in the campground. He said there was no permanent dwelling on the campground previously. He said his proposal would be “owner/caretaker/manager.” He said that Atty. Branse’s suggested wording doesn’t deal with owner at all. He said that one of the two homes would be for the owner, Ray Crossen, who wants to start construction soon. Discussion followed between Atty. Capossela and Yorgensen about the two proposed houses or dwellings and current regulations. Yorgensen said the houses must be accessories to the campground, or else there would be conflict with some of the other
regulations. Tulis commented that Section 5.06.01.01 is not addressed at all. Tulis asked why two houses are needed, and Mr. Crossen replied that one would be for the manager and one for a full-time caretaker. He said that he wanted someone to be there 24/7 in case he, the owner, was absent or on vacation, for instance. Possible long-term complications were discussed. Atty. Capossela said he would like to see the Commission allow two houses, and he would then come up with a site plan for one of the houses. He said the Commission could put on it whatever conditions it wanted. An extended discussion ensued, including various possible changes to the regulations in order to maintain consistency throughout.
Section 11.19.19, Accessory Uses – Atty. Capossela said that in his opinion a camp store (with sale of beer), an office, and conference or banquet facilities should be allowed. He said that although Atty. Branse’s memo suggests these facilities should be “designed for the exclusive use of the occupants of the campground,” he would like it to read “primary use of the occupants of the campground.” Yorgensen commented that even the town is required to get a special permit for any entertainment. Atty. Capossela said he is opposed to Atty. Branse’s statement, “Each and every event to be held at a campground should require a separate Special Permit.” St. Louis asked Mr. Crossen what kind of special events were planned, and Mr. Crossen replied baby
showers, wedding anniversaries, birthday parties, and the like. He said that the capacity of the building is 160-170. Atty. Capossela asked which events, including outside events, the Commission would like to see permitted, and then control could be considered. Yorgensen said that outdoor concerts and festivals would not be allowed, and that live entertainment is prohibited in a commercial zone. Discussion followed concerning outdoor music vs. outdoor concerts and what is permitted. Mr. Crossen said that the camp store will be 30’ by 30’, and that the office would be part of the store. Tulis said that no cash bar would be allowed at events, but if an event such as a wedding occurred and liquor was served, that would be allowed. Yorgensen agreed. There was discussion concerning private functions and the method of buying/distributing liquor. St. Louis told Mr. Crossen that he should find out what licenses, if any, are
needed for these private functions. Yorgensen asked Atty. Capossela to come up with specific language concerning what forms of liquor would be sold in the camp store. Atty. Capossela asked if he could deal directly with Atty. Branse, and Yorgensen replied no, we don’t want to be circumvented. Yorgensen said that if an event is either inside or outside, open to the public, and there is a charge, the event is not allowed; if the event is a private party or for campers and not open to the public, it would be allowed as an accessory to the campground; and if the event is open to the public, is inside or outside, and is free, a special exception is needed. Atty. Capossela commented that most things Mr. Crossen wants are already permitted. He asked that the Public Hearing be kept open. St. Louis said that the next meeting will be on May 20, and that revisions should be brought back at that time. Yorgensen said that it would be preferable
for the office to get the revisions back before that time.
St. Louis read aloud the following into the Public Record concerning Referral #03-03-31-WN, re: Campgrounds.
WINCOG’s Regional Planning Commission (RPC) and staff reviewed this referral
at its April 2nd meeting. In reviewing the proposed changes to the Willington
Zoning Regulations, the RPC is concerned primarily with evaluating whether and
how the proposal is compatible with the Windham Region Land Use Plan and
whether the proposal is likely to create adverse intermunicipal impacts. In this
capacity, the RPC offers the following comments:
· The proposed zone amendment could have an adverse impact on the Town of
Ashford depending upon the location and intensity of the proposed new use.
If a banquet facility/campground development is proposed in the Designed
Recreation Zone on the Ashford town boundary, the Willington Planning and Zoning Commission should consider the potential for negative impacts from traffic, sewer and water drainage, storm water runoff, odors, noise, and lighting.
MOTION: To continue Public Hearing on File #2003-16 until May 20, 2003.
By: Tulis Seconded: Lytwyn
Result: Motion passes unanimously.
REGULAR MEETING
MOTION: To add to the agenda under Pre-Application Mr. Amedy for his
proposal for an Adult Community on property with frontage on
River Road and Baxter Road.
By: Tulis Seconded: Lytwyn
Result: Motion passes unanimously.
St. Louis said that there was discussion on this pre-application at the April 1 meeting and a site walk has been done with Ellis, Gray, Tulis, and Trueb present.
Steve Amedy said they want to do 63 age-restricted condos. He said Gardner & Peterson put three proposals together for them. He gave details of each proposal. He said one proposal reflects the 200’ buffer, although the Commission has the ability to waive it down, perhaps to 100’. He said in the second proposal the number of units didn’t change but all units are located on top. With the third proposal, if the 100’ buffer is allowed, the road pattern can be changed to avoid the monotony of straight lines. He noted two sides would need a 100’ buffer with this proposal.
Tulis commented that although he was concerned about the visibility of the condos from Rt. 32, trees shield the proposed area from sight. Mr. Amedy said that a few more trees have to be taken out in the septic area.
Tulis suggested several “tweakings,” including the cul-de-sac. He suggested access off a side road instead of Rt. 32. He said he didn’t want six more curb cuts off Rt. 32. Mr. Amedy replied that they have taken out several curb cuts. He talked about one lot out of the 4 on Rt. 32, saying that property must consist of 25 acres to have “equestrian status.” He said that his client would not like to take 4 lots off the table. There was discussion about shared driveways, with Mr. Amedy saying his experience has been that people shy away from them.
Tulis asked about recreation, and Mr. Amedy replied that there will be no pool or community building, but rather limited passive recreation consisting of trails and paths. He said that a gazebo may be built.
Gray commented that a 200’ buffer is required for Designed Elderly, and Yorgensen agreed. Yorgensen said that a 100’ buffer could be proposed with discretion.
E. New Business
1. File #2003-21 – Application for Zoning Regulation Changes to Section 3.78 regarding
dog kennels. Applicant: Baywood Kennels, LLC. (Received 4/15/2003; Public
Hearing 6/3/2003; Decision by 7/15/2003.)
A Public Hearing is set for 6/3/2003.
2. File #2003-15 – Application for Zone Change for property on 150 Village Hill Road
(Map 47, Lot 36A and Map 43, Lot 124) Rainbow Acres Campground (aka
Wilderness Lake). Owner/Applicant: KMC, LLC. (Received 4/1/03; Public Hearing
by 6/3/03; Decision by 7/1/03.
The Public Hearing on this application has been continued until May 20.
F. Old Business
1. File #2003-16 – Application for Zoning Regulation Changes to Section 11.19
regarding campgrounds. Applicant: KMC, LLC. (Received 4/1/2003; Public
Hearing 5/6/2003; Decision by 7/1/2003.)
The Public Hearing on this application has been continued until May 20.
G. Minutes
Deferred until next meeting.
H. Correspondence
1. Letter dated May 5, 2003 from Planning & Zoning to Thomas D. & Irma L. Buccino
re: Cease & Desist Order
2. Letter dated May 5, 2003 from Planning & Zoning to Yong Sheng Chao
re: Cease and Desist Order
3. Letter dated April 30 from Zoning Board of Appeals to Christopher Turkington
re: Christopher M. Turkington Landscaping, Application #1999-13
4. Article, “Land Use and Planning – Second Story on Garage Enlarges Nonconforming
Use”
5. “CT Metropatterns: A Regional Agenda for Conformity and Prosperity” send by CT
Conference of Municipalities.
Yorgensen said that two Cease and Desists were sent out, and they are also working with ZBA to void out the landscaping permit for Mr. Turkington because he has not complied with the permit.
I. Staff Report
Yorgensen said she has gotten more complaints about The Eagle. She said she is working on pulling information together concerning GIS (Geographic Information Systems).
J. Discussion
Yorgensen reminded members that a Public Hearing is required before a Special Permit is issued.
K. Adjournment
MOTION: To adjourn at 11:39 p.m.
By: Radell Seconded: Gray
Result: Motion passes unanimously.
Respectfully Submitted,
Susan S. Nimerowski
| 
