PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
January 22, 2008
REGULAR MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman John Loomis called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices. The following members were present: Ferguson Jansen, Susan Bednarcyk, Carol Cole, Mark Drake, Charles Houlihan, James Daley, Gerry Post, and Julie Meyer. Also in attendance were Hiram Peck, Director of Community Planning & Development, as well as other interested parties.
II. SEATING OF ALTERNATES
There were none.
III. UPDATE ON CAPITAL PROJECTS WITH RICHARD SAWITZKE, TOWN ENGINEER, INCLUDING ANY NEW INFORMATION ON THE MEADOWOOD “TRIANGLE”
Mr. Sawitzke distributed copies of a handout showing the capital improvement projects. He stated that this Commission is getting to review this very early on in this process. These projects have not gone through the Finance Department nor the Board of Selectman and Board of Finance. It is possible that these projects will be revised. Mr. Sawitzke stated that this handout shows projects for the next six years, although he will be focusing this discussion on FY 08/09.
Mr. Sawitzke discussed the Simsbury Public School’s program for capital maintenance including HVAC boiler replacement and Latimer Lane and Tootin Hills roof replacement. He stated that these projects may be eligible for State education grant reimbursement. Mr. Sawitzke also discussed their improvement projects including their network systems technology, Henry James Main Office and Media Center relocation and renovation and Latimer Lane Main Office and Media Center Art/Modular Classroom replacement. The second two projects would be eligible for State grant participation. This work would not be happening during the next fiscal year, although it is shown because of the new State Board of Education Guidelines. In order for a project to be submitted for consideration, the money must first be approved locally. The expected reimbursement level is approximately 30%, although this does change from time to time. Commissioner Cole questioned why the main office replacements are so high.
Mr. Sawitzke stated that the media center and the main office have never been renovated in either school. The media centers are being expanded. Regarding the modular classroom replacements, Commissioner Houlihan questioned if this would get rid of all of the modular classrooms at Latimer Lane. Mr. Sawitzke stated that he could not promise that they would go away. He also questioned how many boilers would be replaced for the $700,000. Mr. Sawitzke stated that this also includes some HVAC; he believes this money is for all three schools.
Regarding Culture, Parks and Recreation for FY 08/09, Mr. Sawitzke stated that they have $225,000 under Simsbury Farms improvements, which is for an access road to separate the golf clubhouse traffic from going by the main recreation facility. The second item is for Simsbury Farms repairs, including the apple barn and the golf clubhouse, i.e. recarpeting, bathrooms, new energy efficient fixtures and limited repairs on the refrigeration system on the ice rink, etc. The third item is for architectural services for the main building at Simsbury Farms for FY 09/10. He stated that this building is approximately 40 years old. The fourth item is for the park golf maintenance facility in the amount of $1.25 million. This would include a joint maintenance facility to combine the parks and golf maintenance operations; both
of those building are over 30 years old. The new facility would be located in the same general location as the current facility. The present golf facility would be used as a storage building and the old golf course maintenance building would be removed. Commissioner Daley questioned why these are treated as capital items and not paid for out of the golf fees. Mr. Sawitzke stated that on the $70,000 repair item that maybe it should be paid from those fees. Some of the smaller items will not be bonded; it would be an internal loan, which is a capital non-recurring fund. This money would be paid back. Chairman Loomis stated that Commissioner Daley raises an important question and one that has never been entirely answered.
Regarding the renovations of the new building for $4 million, Commissioner Bednarcyk questioned if all of these improvements to the buildings were needed, if it was possible to get one new comprehensive building. Mr. Sawitzke stated that the main building would be a new building. Commissioner Post stated that Simsbury Farms has a long-term plan that was put together ten years ago. They have been systematically implementing the replacement of that plan. He stated that Mr. Sawitzke is updating these figures and continuing on with this plan. The Recreation Department and Simsbury Farms Golf Course are two separate agencies. They are merging two maintenance facilities into one and getting rid of four buildings. Also, the Simsbury Farms Commission was put in place to oversee the complex. Commissioner
Jansen questioned if the Town shows a clear P&L on the facility. He questioned if the taxpayers knew how much was put in there every year. Mr. Sawitzke stated that it is a Revenue Fund; there is a revenue side and an expenditure side.
Regarding the Open Space Acquisition Program, Mr. Sawitzke stated that Laurel Hill, a 60 acre parcel, is a $720,000 project of which they had a $350,000 grant approved. This is a piece of land that has been on the POCD for a very long time. They are asking for this money in the FY 08/09. The second item is a request from the Simsbury Land Trust for the Tulmeadow Forest Land. The SLT is asking for Town assistance, although the bulk of their money will come from grants and donations. Regarding the Firetown/Barndoor – Culbro Triangle, (Meadowood) Mr. Sawitzke stated that the dollar amount appears all in one year; it is $2.75 million. Although this dollar amount is shown all in one year, the cash flow could occur over five years ($500,000 per year in four equal payments and on the fifth year $750,000,
which includes legal fees). Commissioner Daley questioned if this dollar amount shown was the net amount of the State grant. Mr. Sawitzke stated that the grant for the Laurel Hill property was already awarded to the Town. The grant on this Triangle is an earmark in the State Bond Program and is for Grasslands preservation. This grant is not guaranteed unless the Bond Commission selects this for bonding. Commissioner Houlihan questioned if they were going to have to pay interest on the Firetown/Barndoor Triangle. Mr. Sawitzke stated that they would not be paying interest. Regarding Ethel Walker, Mr. Sawitzke stated that there are two phases; phase 2a and 2b are options. The first option needs to be exercised by 2011/2012 and the second option by 2013/2014. He stated that they would be applying for certain grants. The $1million on option 2a is only an earmark. Commissioner Cole questioned if some of the money could be
raised by private donation; she questioned if this language would be in the referendum.
Mr. Sawitzke stated that the next page of the handout is a broad range of infrastructure. Regarding the projects for FY 08/09, the first item listed is regarding the streetscape on Hopmeadow Street. They would continue the plantings and brick veneer sidewalks, which would be done in conjunction with the reconstruction of Hopmeadow Street and Drake Hill Road. This project would also complete the bikeway. The amount for $325,000 is to finish the streetscape from Plank Hill Road to the Drake Hill/Hopmeadow project; that amount may be reduced to cover just the State project area. Another item is the Eno air conditioning and the entrance project. An Eno improvement program has been put together, which totals $2 million. The Eno improvement program for $1.25 million includes a fire suppression system and
includes reconstructing the external walks, halls, and ramps. It also includes the clock tower, accessibility improvements inside, signage, and a number of other improvements. All of these improvements were scheduled over time, although because of the relationship of a lot of these projects, it makes sense to go forth doing these projects at the same time. These monies will not only be covered by debt, but there are also some funds available associated with Eno. They will also be applying for State grants and Main Street Partnership has indicated their desire to do some fundraising. Regarding the GIS implementation and mapping system upgrade, Mr. Sawitzke stated that these amounts have been in the program for many years; they would like to start moving on this project. These items will most likely be wrapped into a full technology integration program, although that decision has not yet been made. Regarding the Community/Senior Center needs
assessment, Mr. Sawitzke stated that this amount is shown because it suggests the need for a new community center; it is shown to make people discuss this possibility. Commissioner Bednarcyk stated that she has explored the possibility and looked into other Towns. She feels that Simsbury does not treat their senior population very well.
Regarding the GIS and mapping upgrade, Chairman Loomis asked Mr. Sawitzke if he was satisfied with this and if this would give the Town what it needed. Mr. Sawitzke stated that this came from a needs assessment, which was done several years ago. He stated that there might be some significant savings on the mapping upgrade; they are participating in a grant application out of OPM.
Regarding the other items, including water and sewer extensions, these items need to be authorized. Mr. Sawitzke stated that these are monies that are borrowed internally out of reserves and then paid back with interest by the users.
Regarding the items for Public Works, Mr. Sawitzke stated that a good portion of these items would not be bonded. The one program that will need money over the next several years is the paving management program. The cost of paving has greatly increased. The other item is for miscellaneous bikeway improvements. There are a great deal of little things that need to be done. Also, there is money needed for the sidewalk program; many of the sidewalks in Town are very old. This money would allow the Town to rebuild a small portion of the sidewalks each year. Mr. Sawitzke stated that the major program in FY 09/10 is the major bikeway resurfacing for approximately $500,000. Some of the bikeways are already more than 20 years old.
IV. PROSPECTIVE BOARD OF SELECTMAN 8-24 CAPTIAL REFERRAL ON MEADOWOOD, AND DISCUSSION ON WHAT RECOMMENDATION THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY WISH TO MAKE WITH RESPECT TO THE DISPOSITION AND USE OF THE MEADOWOOD “TRIANGLE”.
Mr. Peck stated that at the last Board of Selectman meeting, the Board authorized some final testing on this property and they also sent this to the Planning Commission for its formal 8-24 referral. In the past, there was detailed discussion regarding this project and its process. The motion that the Commission ultimately passed was that the Town purchase the Triangle. Now, the Planning Commission needs to come back with a formal 8-24 referral so it can go forward.
At this time, Mr. Peck recommended that the Planning Commission not get into a detailed discussion other than to ask general questions. Mr. Peck stated that he would be happy to research any questions made by the Commissioners. This issue will be on the next agenda for the official 8-24 referral.
Chairman Loomis stated that when the Planning Commission approved this recommendation, it was for the proposed settlement agreement. A number of changes have been worked through, which became part of that recommendation. He would like to see the actual changes since this Commission recommended, positively, the proposed settlement agreement. In terms of the 8-24 referral, Mr. Peck stated that there are not any changes. The attorneys for Griffen Land and the Town of Simsbury have been negotiating back and forth on some of the details for the ultimate use of the property. He stated that there has not been any substantial changes; nothing has changed with regard to price or structuring.
Commissioner Houlihan questioned if there was an approved ratified settlement. Mr. Peck stated that the Board of Selectman agreed to allow the Town attorney to proceed with getting this back in front of the court for ultimate settlement. There has already been significant testing done on the Triangle in 1999 and 2004 and recommendations have been made. Commissioner Houlihan also questioned what the additional testing entails that the Board of Selectman has recently authorized. Mr. Peck stated that they would like to know if the Town’s Environmental Consultant can give this property a clean bill of health so the Town can go ahead and purchase it. If this test comes back as it has in the past, then the BOS would probably recommend the purchase. Mr. Peck stated that they are trying to get this back in
front of the court, get the testing done and get the 8-24 referral completed concurrently so the Town does not run into any problems and not be able to go to the May referendum on time.
Chairman Loomis stated that if this is ready for the May referendum, it would be helpful to the Board of Selectman and to this Commission, to recommend what use or uses may be appropriate for this property. This could be a general statement affirming what is already known, or they could put emphasis on one area or another. If they make a recommendation, they need to know what is already in the agreement. Mr. Peck stated that he does not think it will be a problem to get permission from the First Selectman to get a copy of the agreement for this Commission to look at. Chairman Loomis asked the Commission to think about the issue until the next meeting so they will be ready to talk about uses for this property and how they might express this. Mr. Lescalleet, from Griffin Land, commented that testing could be done
on the property.
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of December 11, 2007
Commissioner Bednarcyk made a motion to approve the minutes of the December 11, 2007 meeting. Commissioner Meyer seconded the motion.
Commissioner Bednarcyk offered edits on Page 2 and Chairman Loomis offered edits on Page 1.
The motion to approve the minutes of December 11, 2007, as amended, was approved by Commissioners Meyer, Jansen, Houlihan, Bednarcyk, Post and Loomis, who were present at that meeting.
Mr. Peck stated that if there are edits that a Commission member would like to get into the record, he asked that they send them into his secretary, Lois. She will then put them together as, “edited minutes” and “original minutes” so both sets can be reviewed by the Commission.
VI. REPORT ON THE JANUARY 4, 2008 MEETING BETWEEN MARY GLASSMAN AND JOHN LOOMIS
Chairman Loomis distributed an outline of his January 4th meeting with Mary Glassman.
Regarding the 2007 POCD, Chairman Loomis requested that Mr. Peck keep the Commission posted as this legislation in terms of detail. Mr. Peck stated that they currently do not have anything from OPM; they are putting together the forms to apply for the grant. The scope is still old plans and not implementation.
Regarding Chairman Loomis’ meeting with John Hampton on December 15th, Chairman Loomis stated that Mr. Hampton thought that the Board of Selectman had supported the Plan, which had not happened. There was never an official expression of support or any supportive comments.
Regarding the Town’s pending PDD, Commissioner Meyer questioned if there were any grant options available to fund a Charrette. Mr. Peck stated that they are currently putting together a proposal and that they are looking at a variety of options. Putting together several grants is also a possibility. Commissioner Meyer suggested getting help from the community or hiring a grant writer, whose fee or salary would be paid contingent upon a grant being secured. Mr. Peck stated that, although he would never want to turn down help, a person might be perceived as having their own agenda or interest. Chairman Loomis stated that Ms. Glassman has been consistent in supporting the idea of Charrettes and public input.
VII. DISCUSSION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT THROUGH THE POCD-RECOMMENDED PLAN INPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE (PIC)
Regarding the POCD’s implementation, Chairman Loomis asked for the Commission’s input. He stated that he has asked Mary Glassman if she would consider chairing the Plan Implementation Committee (PIC) or an Executive Committee under PIC, if there is one. Ms. Glassman is considering this request. Commissioner Meyer stated that she would like to see Ms. Glassman in one of these positions. She is in the leadership role and she is not involved with the Commissions who designed PIC. Commissioner Bednarcyk stated that she would like to see Glenn Chalder back to help expedite this process more quickly. Commissioner Jansen feels that a timeline is needed. Commissioner Houlihan stated that, ideally, a 3-hour segment of time on a Saturday would make it possible to get through the 127 policies needed. Commissioner Cole suggested that people review and prioritize the policies and then get together to discuss them.
Mr. Peck suggested that PIC could be comprised of a member of each of the organizations, although this is usually a non-workable number. As they start the process of implementation, they could only involve some of the organizations to focus on specific issues, then move on to involve other members for other issues, although all members of PIC would be informed of all issues. Mr. Peck stated that a letter could be sent out to all of the organizations to pick a member to be on this Committee. Then another letter could then be sent with instructions to focus on a certain part of the Plan, which have goals and objectives that are pertinent to their area of expertise. Chairman Loomis stated that it is critical as to how PIC gets started. Commissioner Jansen stated that Glenn Chalder and Hiram Peck have a better
knowledge of this. He feels that they should both sit down together and research what goals/objectives each organization, not each member, should focus on. This could help direct each Commission better. Commissioner Houlihan suggested that Mr. Chalder could be on each Commission’s agenda to talk about what their focus should be. Commissioner Bednarcyk stated she liked the idea of a big initial meeting so everyone is on the same page. Chairman Loomis stated that he will speak with Ms. Glassman to request authorization to work with Glenn Chalder. The Commission agreed that the POCD needs to be implemented; Simsbury’s goals and objectives need to get done.
VIII. REPORT ON THE PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Peck stated that 57 Plans in total have been distributed to date. They have given out 33 paper copies and 24 CD copies. The paper copy costs $40 and the CD costs $10. An additional copy will also be sent to the Library and one will be given to the consultants of the airport study.
IX. REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSIONER JULIE MEYER ON THE CAPITAL REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (CRCOG) JANUARY 17, 2008 MEETING
Commissioner Meyer distributed meeting minutes and maps to the Commission. Hank Gruner, President of Programs at the Science Center of Connecticut, was the main field biologist for the biodiversity project, which was the premise of this CRCOG meeting. Commissioner Meyer elaborated on the minutes of this meeting regarding biodiversity. She also discussed the biodiversity map of Simsbury and the primary and secondary areas that are considered being preserved. Chairman Loomis stated that many maps usually do not show clusters of species so people do not have an exact area where these are located to help protect them more. He also stated that many recommendations from Mr. Gruner are in the POCD.
X. DISCUSSION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S REPRESENTATION AT THE CAPITAL REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (CRCOG) MONTHLY MEETINGS.
Chairman Loomis stated that they have had discussion regarding this issue at prior meetings. The consensus was that 1-3 people could represent this Planning Commission on a more regular basis, or, if there was only one person, there could be 1-2 alternates. This would help to give more continuity to CRCOG and to this Commission. Commissioner Jansen stated that he would like to see one main representative with an alternate. He believes in continuity and feels that Commissioner Meyer did a great job at the last meeting. Commissioner Houlihan stated that he likes continuity, although there is the aspect that CRCOG has specific agendas where continuity is not always important. He would like to see one primary person because he believes this will help the Commission be informed. Commissioner Cole stated
that she likes the idea of the members alternating. She enjoys going a few times per year to the CRCOG meetings. She does not feel the need to have the same person there; continuity is not necessary. Chairman Loomis stated that nothing precludes them from sending more than one Commission member to any meeting. He stated that they would circulate the agenda to all of the members in case more than one member would like to attend. Commissioner Bednarcyk stated that if Commissioner Meyer would like to be the primary person and if other Commissioners would like to go, that would be fine. They could be flexible. Commissioner Post stated that continuity does not seem to be an issue and feels that if Commissioner Meyer would like to go to all of the meeting that would be fine, but everyone should still have the opportunity to attend. Commissioner Drake suggested that a time period be put on members who would like to attend these meeting to
allow a rotation every 4-6 months. Commissioner Meyer stated she would be fine with being the primary person for the next six months with having Commissioners Cole and Drake as alternates. Because Commissioner Meyer stated that she could not attend the February CRCOG meeting, Commissioner Drake volunteered to go in her place.
XI. DISCUSSION ON THE CONSIDERATION, INCLUDING PUBLIC AUDIENCE, OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDAS.
Commissioner Bednarcyk motioned to put Public Audience on every agenda. Commissioner Meyer seconded the motion.
Commissioner Houlihan stated that although public audience has a place here, they would need to establish some rules. If a hearing is closed, public audience should not be allowed to give new testimony. Commissioner Cole stated that they should stipulate how long public audience should be. She stated that some people would really like to comment during some discussions and to ask questions, although she is not sure they should get into that. She realizes that during an application, this would be fine, although on a major issued i.e. the POCD, a separate meeting should be held to allow people to speak. She stated that there are many different options. She stated that although she is not opposed to public audience, they need to think carefully as to how to implement it so they can still have effective
meetings. Commissioner Jansen stated that although he is not against public audience, it is very complicated. People could talk about anything and this could run into problems if an applicant or their attorney is not present. This could cause a lot of controversy. Commissioner Meyer feels that people want the opportunity to get their opinion on public record and the Commission would not have to respond to their comments if it was not appropriate. Commissioner Daley stated that if there is not focus of a specific topic, it could be very unmanageable. Commissioner Bednarcyk stated that good ideas come from public audience even when there is not a specific topic. Commissioner Post agreed with Commissioner Daley. There should be some guidelines before implementing public audience, especially when applicants are not here. Mr. Peck stated that although he is not opposed to having public input, there are a number of different ways that
this can be done. He stated that people often e-mail, write letters, call and come into the office regarding a particular issue, i.e. a problem or dispute with a neighbor. He does not feel that these issues should be on the agenda. He feels that inviting general public comment at meetings is inviting a potential problem because of this Commission’s special function regarding land use. He stated that if this Commission is having a public hearing regarding an application, people have a right to voice their opinion. If it is not a public hearing, it would be at the discretion of the Chairman as to whether or not to invite questions or comments.
Mr. Marvin Negrin, 7 Shaw Drive, stated his concerns with public audience. He feels that people should only be allowed to discuss what is on the agenda. He feels that public audience should only be allowed at the end of the meeting with certain time limits. Mr. Peck stated that the problem with putting this at the end of the meeting is that the Commission will have already made their decision.
Mr. Jay Bailey, 12 Lincoln Lane, stated that he feels that the public should be allowed to speak. The land use boards are different, but it is still important for people to state their opinion. Feedback is important. He feels that this would eliminate a great deal of frustration and contentiousness, which are currently prevalent throughout the community.
The Commission continued to discuss this issue. Mr. Peck will be looking at how other municipalities deal with public audience, while Chairman Loomis and Mr. Peck create a draft regarding making it clear that people can raise questions or make comments on a more regular basis.
Commissioner Bednarcyk motioned to withdraw her previous motion regarding public audience. Commissioner Meyer withdrew her second to that motion.
XII. STAFF REPORTS
Planned Development District (PDD) – Mr. Peck stated that the PDD has been given to the First Selectman. It should be available within the next few days. There will be a meeting at the end of this week to discuss the next steps in this process.
Airport Study – Mr. Peck stated that the first public informational session to bring people up to date as to where they are, was very thorough. He would be happy to get the information from that meeting to anyone who was interested. They are currently beginning to work on the economic aspects as to what the potential impacts would be if the Town should decide to acquire the airport. He stated that there would be at least two other public informational meetings as this study proceeds. When the final draft is put together, there will be a public hearing, as required. Chairman Loomis stated that there is an expensive rebuilding of the runway in increasing its width and perhaps increasing its length and/or moving it, which would all be funded up to approximately 97 ½% by the Government and State.
The Town’s portion would not be expected to go over 3 ½ %. This study should take approximately 6 months.
Publications of new full size, folding Future Land Use Plan – Mr. Peck stated that there is no new information regarding this issue. He will be getting more pricing on graphics prior to the next meeting. He stated that during Mr. Sawitzke’s presentation regarding GIS for the next fiscal year, he would like to emphasize the importance of this in terms of being able to do these maps themselves without much difficulty. He stated that he is hopeful that this will go forward.
Regarding the Aquifer Protection Regulations, Mr. Peck stated that the Town has a requirement to get these Regulations and maps in place as well fields in other Towns get mapped. They need to make sure these Regulations fit together and are coordinated with other Towns. He stated that later this week, they will be having a meeting with Planning Directors from the surrounding Towns to discuss how things work on a resource basis as opposed to a Town line basis.
XIII. COMMUNICATIONS
Prospective nomination and election of a Planning Commission Secretary – Chairman Loomis stated that they need to move ahead with filling the Secretary position. He suggested that, in order to give the new members and the continuing members time to better know each other, he suggested that the election of a new Secretary be placed on the February 26, 2008 agenda. It would also be placed on the following agenda and the vote would occur following that in March. Nominations would be taken no earlier than at the second notice meeting. Commissioner Houlihan stated that most Commissions in Town, when the 2-year term ends and the Board changes, that Commission addresses the Chairman, Vice Chairman and Secretary. He questioned why this Commission does not do that. Chairman Loomis stated that there is
no requirement for that on this Commission. The Rules state that the Chairman and the Secretary serve at the pleasure of the Commission.
Mr. Peck stated that there are a series of land use education classes, which will be held over the next 6 months. He stated that if anyone was interested in attending, please let him know.
XIV. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Jansen motioned to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Post and unanimously approved.
________________________________________
John Loomis, Chairman
| 
