Simsbury, CT - Planning Commission Minutes

Chairman John Loomis called the special meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Main Meeting Room of the PlaceNameplaceSimsbury PlaceTypeTown Hall. The following members were present: Secretary Ernest Gardow, Susan Bednarcyk, Ferguson Jansen, Carol Cole, and Mark Drake, with Charles Houlihan arriving just after the call to order. Also in attendance were Hiram Peck, Director of Community Planning & Development and Emil Dahlquist, Chairman, Design Review Board, as well as other interested parties.

Chairman Loomis informed all who had not heard yet about regular Commissioner Greg Piecuch’s resignation effective a few days earlier. Chairman Loomis characterized Commissioner Piecuch’s contributions to both the regular work of the Planning Commission as well as the Draft Plan as significant and substantial.

Secretary Gardow read the Legal Notice into the record. Attorney John Rubrich, representing the applicant, described for the Commission the existing 4.6 acre property at the above location on the east side of Terry’s Plain. The proposed subdivision would result in 3 lots, ranging between 1.3 and 1.6 acres. All lots have a buildable square and 200 feet of frontage with direct access to Terry’s Plain. All lots are to be served by septic and well and the Farmington Valley Health District has provided an approval letter. Attorney Rubrich referenced a letter submitted requesting a waiver of the open space requirement. He described a 20% conservation easement that is being proposed in lieu of the open space, which would consist of the existing buffer of trees surrounding the lot. Specific wording for the easement is available in the file. Mr. Peck handed out a revised Staff Report which included additional information on the property’s flood elevations.

Attorney Rubrich further clarified for Secretary Gardow the area of the proposed conservation easement. Attorney Rubrich confirmed for Adele Jones, 70 Terry’s addressStreetPlain Road, that each of the 3 lots would have 200 feet of frontage. He further explained the purpose and intent of the conservation easement to preserve the existing buffer. He indicated for Commissioner Houlihan that the proposed easement is approximately 50 feet wide across the rear of the property and 30 feet wide across the sides. Attorney Rubrich confirmed for Chairman Loomis that the easement would be 20% of the total size of the lot. In response to Commissioner Bednarcyk, Attorney Rubrich indicated alternative plans would have to be developed to show a dedication of open space, but suggested in order to maintain the frontages on each of the lots a landlocked, inaccessible open space parcel would result. In response to Chairman Loomis, Attorney Rubrich and Engineer Tom Shannon indicated there is approximately 20 feet between the edge of the proposed easement and the building square on the east side of the property and about 15 feet on the northern side.

Mr. Peck and Attorney Rubrich confirmed for Ms. Jones that no variances are being requested to build on the lots and that all of the setback requirements would have to be met. The easement will ensure the conservation of the existing vegetation and will work to prevent clear-cutting the lots.

In response to Anthony Napolitano of addressStreet39 Banks Road, Chairman Loomis noted the Subdivision Regulations do have a requirement of a 20% dedication of open space to be deeded to the Town, but the applicant is requesting a waiver of that requirement. Commissioner Houlihan confirmed for Mr. Napolitano that if deeded to the Town, there would be no taxes collected on it. He also suggested the applicant has indicated the resulting open space parcel would be landlocked and not easily accessible to the public and the Town would still be obligated to maintain it. Commissioner Bednarcyk expressed her strong disagreement with Commissioner Houlihan, defending the open space requirement and suggesting other towns have even increased the requirement to provide for more open space.

Joyce Howard, 116 Terry’s addressStreetPlain Road, questioned who would be responsible if trees were accidentally taken down during construction. Mr. Peck suggested it depends on how the easement is worded, but that most likely the removal of hazardous trees would be allowed. There would also be a stipulation of replacement of trees unnecessarily taken down. Referencing the draft conservation easement, Attorney Rubrich noted the owner can be required to restore the parcel to its prior state. Mr. Peck offered to get a copy of the conservation easement wording to the Commission.

Neither the applicant nor their agent was present tonight. Mr. Peck indicated there had been some difficulty in gathering information from the applicant earlier that afternoon and that the applicant had requested the public hearing be continued until next week. He suggested those members of the audience interested in this application contact the Planning office on Tuesday to confirm whether this will be taken up at the next meeting.

Kevin Kowalski, Fire Marshall and Chief of Administrative Services for the Volunteer Fire Department, indicated the Fire District is beginning its final project regarding facility improvements to the various fire houses in town. The Main firehouse in placePlaceNameSimsbury PlaceTypeCenter is the last to be worked on. The District is currently in negotiations with the Masons to obtain their property to the south of the Main firehouse. The intent over the next 2 years is to provide the Masons in return with a 1-acre parcel to be subdivided out of the 7+ acre parcel the Fire District owns in Weatogue. It is still being determined whether the Fire District theoretically has one free cut on that property or whether it will officially be a subdivision. Mr. Kowalski emphasized they are still in the process of researching all the records and plot plans, but the Fire District wants to pursue an open process and ensure the public that access to the soccer and football fields in Weatogue will still be provided.

In response to Commissioner Bednarcyk, Mr. Kowalski indicated it was considered to move the proposed 1-acre lot back farther but that the Fire District was trying to maintain their drill grounds through the entire field and not impact the park activities. In addition, nearby wetlands also limit where the new 1-acre lot can be.

Commissioner Jansen noted the recommendation in the Draft Plan is for more of a mixed activity on the west side of Hopmeadow to allow for a more vibrant downtown center. Commissioner Houlihan questioned whether the facilities in Weatogue could be expanded to supplement what exists in the Center. Mr. Kowalski noted the facilities in the Center act as their ‘Town Hall’ for their small staff and that space provides the best access to the public within town. In addition, their maintenance facility is located in the Center and would be difficult to relocate. He assured the Commission that the Fire District has discussed a variety of options and are trying to achieve the best scenario both fiscally and operationally.

In response to Barbara Levine of addressStreetRiverwalk Drive, Mr. Kowalski described the limited use of the new 1-acre lot by the Masons as a meeting hall, averaging but not limited to 2 meetings a month and approximately 12-14 cars in the parking lot. Mr. Kowalski indicated for Noel Christensen, of addressStreet272 Hopmeadow St., that the site plan amendment process will happen at a later date at which the building placement on the lot would be presented and discussed. Mr. Kowalski responded to Alan Needham of addressStreet2 Basswood Lane that his question regarding the effect on parking for the football field would also need to be addressed during the site plan amendment process.

Mr. Kowalski confirmed for Liz Roper, 60 CityplaceSimsbury Manor, that the land swap to acquire the current Mason property in the Center would be necessary for the improvements to be done on the firehouse. He assured Ms. Roper that the football field would not eventually also be swapped out. She suggested any type of building there in Weatogue would block the view of the Mountain. In response to Wally Musick of Old Meadow Plain, Mr. Kowalski noted the proposed Mason building in Weatogue would need to stay within the side and rear yard requirements and would not affect the trees and stream to the north of the current station. He confirmed for Ms. Roper that the Masons would own the 1-acre lot outright and it would be private property.

Chairman Loomis expressed appreciation to the Fire District for sharing their plans early. However, since it has not yet been determined whether a free split will be allowed Chairman Loomis noted he is considering this as a preliminary viewing of the project and that a more complete application addressing the Subdivision Requirements would be necessary. Mr. Peck confirmed the applicant understands this is the beginning of the process and there are details still to be worked out. He will continue to work with Mr. Kowalski to tighten up the application as the process evolves. The public hearing will be continued to the next meeting. A site walk will probably be done later in the process.

Proposed Zoning Regulations amendment submitted by William Miller to AMEND Article Seven E. Uses Permitted in B-1, Restricted Business Zones and to ADD Section O. Uses Permitted in all Business Zones or Mixed Use Zones to adopt changes to Zoning Regulations to restrict gross floor area and access requirements for big box retail stores.

Chairman Loomis explained the procedure for the referral and Planning’s role to make a recommendation to Zoning. Mr. Peck indicated Zoning will be addressing the application at their 5/7 meeting. Bill Miller indicated the application before the Commission tonight is a resubmission from that which was originally submitted last winter and subsequently withdrawn. The wording was changed in order to address legality issues that arose, but still attempts to prevent Big Box development in the town of placeCitySimsbury anywhere other than parcels with a curb cut to Route 44.

Mr. Miller went on to describe the backup information included with the amendment. First, he noted that 560 additional petition signatures have been obtained along with the original 2,210 in support of the amendment and he will submit them tonight. Secondly, a traffic study performed on Route 10 by Paul Mission, a well-respected traffic expert, has also been included. He described the 1999 data obtained by Mr. Mission from the State DOT, as well as the projected corresponding increased traffic capacity percentages that would result from building sizes such as 137,000 square feet or 250,000 square feet. Finally, several economic analyses have been included describing the detrimental effect Big Box stores have had on towns such as CityBarnstable, MA and placeCityBrattleboro, VT. Mr. Miller suggested if no caps are put on the size of retail establishments, other than on Route 44, Route 10 will be turned into a 4-lane highway and there will be a negative impact on the town.

In response to Chairman Loomis, Mr. Miller noted the biggest change in the amendment comes with the language that previously prevented the Zoning Commission to even accept an application that would allow for large-scale retail development anywhere but on Route 44. There is also more definition as to how to measure the size of the proposed buildings. Existing establishments can still expand their buildings, but only up to 110% as opposed to the original 120%. The 40,000 square foot cap (via Special Exception) remains the same. In response to Commissioner Jansen, Mr. Miller noted that the amendment would not allow for multiple buildings of 40,000 sq. ft. on the same property by the same developer.

Commissioner Houlihan questioned whether the wording in the ‘Uses Permitted…’ section of the amendment clearly indicated the size limitation did not apply to buildings on Route 44. Mr. Peck indicated the Planning Commission could make recommendations for wording changes, but he cautioned that according to the Statutes the Zoning Commission has limited leeway to change the wording of the amendment prior to ruling on it. There are a variety of procedures that need to be followed once an application comes in for such an amendment, including submission to CRCOG, scheduling a public hearing, etc., and Mr. Miller has already withdrawn his original amendment and resubmitted it with new language.

Commissioner Houlihan questioned how the 20,000 sq. ft. limitation was arrived at and noted that neither the placePlaceNameSkating PlaceTypeCenter nor the banquet facility would be allowed under that limitation. Commissioner Bednarcyk suggested those are not retail uses and would not apply here. Commissioner Houlihan suggested the idea behind form-based development is to allow for flexibility of uses over time. Mr. Miller indicated he sees the cap as actually 40,000 sq. ft. by exception. SHARE thought that, based on keeping within the town’s character, that size would be large plenty large enough to accommodate desirable retail establishments. Chairman Loomis referred to the research done by both Rebecca Augur of CRCOG as well Hiram Peck with regards to other towns’ handling of these types of restrictions. Chairman Loomis thought the smallest cap was around 25,000-30,000 sq. ft. and Mr. Peck suggested placeStafford approved a cap of 55,000 sq. ft. Commissioner Cole suggested if the idea is to prevent Big Box development, the focus should be on traffic and the statistical correlation between building size and the need to widen Route 10.

Mr. Miller confirmed for Commissioner Drake that the traffic study was done based on State data and that the increases in capacity percentages were inferred based on that data. In addition, Mr. Mission pulled information from the 2003 Trip Generation Manual published by the placePlaceTypeInstitute of PlaceNameTransportation Engineers. Mr. Needham indicated Konover Corporation used the same numbers in their presentation. Mr. Needham also noted that the number of trips generated is a function of the size and use of a building as well as whether there is a single or multiple structures. Bruce Elliott, addressStreet21 Lincoln Lane, referred to Michael Goman’s statements suggesting retail buildings need to be at least 135,000 sq. ft. to be considered a destination or an anchor or an attraction. Smaller buildings will not generate that kind of traffic flow. Commissioner Houlihan stressed the recommendation in the Plan to create a master plan or a coordinated look for the entire site.

Joann Pomerantz, addressStreet65 Blue Ridge Drive, questioned how the 40,000 sq. ft. size related to existing buildings within town. Commissioner Jansen noted the entire Fitzgerald’s plaza is approximately 37,500 sq. PlaceTypeplaceft. PlaceNameCommissioner Bednarcyk noted that the Fitzgerald’s building itself is 23,000 sq. ft.

Commissioner Bednarcyk voiced concern, especially in lieu of the current flooding conditions, with continuing to support the proposed expansion of the Center Zone to include the area east of Iron Horse and including such an expansion on the existing map within the Draft. Commissioner Drake clarified that the only parcels to be included in that expansion would be the Band Shell area and the Simscroft Echo property. Commissioner Bednarcyk indicated there is another parcel down by the sewer treatment plant as well. Commissioner Houlihan reiterated only development that is permitted in a floodplain (i.e., pervious parking areas) will be allowed. The original idea was to do a Master Plan and include the Iron Horse parcels in with that and expanding the boundaries there will provide greater flexibility as to the uses for that area. Commissioner Bednarcyk expressed concern about coverage issues and indicated retaining the Industrial designation would eliminate that issue.

Commissioner Jansen suggested adding the words ‘office complex’ to clarify the Tariffville Mill under the introduction to Tariffville on page 74. Commissioner Houlihan noted that the Commission did not seem to have much to say or recommend regarding the Weatogue section of town. Chairman Loomis noted that there had been some trouble defining the boundaries of Weatogue and the Commission decided a more detailed review of the area was necessary.

Commissioner Houlihan questioned who would be charged with developing an adaptive reuse plan for the Dyno Nobel property. Chairman Loomis indicated whomever it would be would need take a proactive without pressure approach. After discussions about how to effectively word the adaptive reuse plan policy without offending the current occupants, it was agreed to change the wording to “Should Dyno-Nobel cease operations in placeCitySimsbury one day, develop a preliminary adaptive reuse plan.” Corresponding wording was also changed within the paragraph under the policy to “In the event of a change in circumstances, this area will be in need of comprehensive planning…”.

Mr. Dahlquist confirmed that the alternative strategy piece for the Northern Gateway was not new, but simply finally put into written form. He clarified for Commissioner Houlihan that the central town green concept was included in the Preferred Strategy. It was agreed, at Commissioner Houlihan’s suggestion, to include language similar to the Preferred Strategy recommending the preservation of the tobacco barns.

Chairman Loomis noted the next step will be to work with Glenn Chalder on the approved changes and produce a camera-ready copy of the Draft Plan to go to printing. In response to Commissioner Drake, Chairman Loomis noted he will be working with Richard Sawitzke and Glenn Chalder on completing the maps.

Chairman Loomis noted that more information will be forthcoming regarding the PDD (Planned Development Districts) as well as the TDRs (Transfer of Development Rights). He characterized it as a work in progress but that the Planning Commission will have input to their development.

Chairman Loomis announced the Riverview groundbreaking ceremony will be held on the morning of 4/19. He noted that the Economic Development workshop on 3/29 and the FOIA information session on 4/10 were both well attended. Finally, he informed the Commission that a suit has been filed by the Intervenor with regard to the addressStreet344 West Mountain Road approval.