These minutes are for information purposes only. For official minutes, please contact the Town Clerk’s Office.
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 22, 2003
CALL TO ORDER
John Loomis, Chairman, called the Regular Meeting of the Simsbury Planning Commission to order at 7:36pm in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices. The following members were present: Ernest Gardow, Pamela Katz, Greg Piecuch, Joan Howard, Carol Cole, Ferg Jansen and David Ryan. Also present was Leonard Tolisano, Senior Planner.
APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES
Chairman Loomis appointed Joan Howard to serve for Susan Bednarcyk.
PRESENTATION BY HANK GRUNER AND ALEX PERSONS, FARMINGTON RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION BIODIVERSITY STUDY.
Mr. Hank Gruner addressed the members. He provided a brief background on the biodiversity project, the goal of which is to comprehensively collect and map biodiversity data and provide conservation tools for planning and site review. The focus of tonight’s presentation was on the mapping to find core habitats for biodiversity. Mr. Gruner discussed biotic corridors, or areas with strong intact ecosystems. These areas are places to focus planning efforts to preserve ecological function. He discussed the difference between focal and generalist species. Focal species are very sensitive to changes in the habitat and require large intact parcels in order to support them. Generalist species are those that do well in disturbance. The types of species present in an area give a
clue to how intact or disturbed that area is.
After collecting the data, the study has done a preliminary analysis before completing the final mapping. Patterns have emerged that show where the primary biotic corridors are. In Simsbury, these patterns include the ridge system (and perch systems), the Farmington River and floodplain area, the trap system, and Great Pond (a draw-down system). Mr. Gruner discussed some secondary areas, and then addressed the issue of connectivity between these different systems. He noted that north-south connections are fairly well established; however, east-west connections are not so strong and tend to break down more quickly. He stressed the importance of maintaining and strengthening this connectivity. In conclusion, Mr. Gruner discussed vernal pool mapping, which is currently in progress.
He noted that the final map will be accompanied byBest Practices Guides and other planning tools for use in supporting biodiversity. He also recognized the assistance and input of Mr. Howard Beach, Chairman of the Inland Wetlands Commission, and Ms. Laurie Whitten, Conservation Officer for the town.
The Commission members then asked questions. Commissioner Katz asked about a break in the corridor along the Farmington River, and Chairman Loomis asked Mr. Gruner to elaborate on the corridors. Mr. Gruner noted that this break is the Drake Hill bridge/Riverside Rd. area. He discussed the idea of proximity as it relates to connectivity. Small breaks or gaps in the corridor are not too damaging. It is important to note, however, that breaks can occur not only with impervious surface, but also by clearing an area. This, too, changes the habitat and should be looked at closely. Commissioner Jansen asked if the 1994 Plan of Development is representative of the patterns borne out by the biodiversity data, and Mr. Gruner stated that the two maps have not been overlaid, so he would guess
that some of the major corridors line up well, but smaller areas may not be so close between the two maps. Commissioner Piecuch asked about wetlands,
Planning Commission Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 2
and Mr. Gruner stated that the study did not seek to identify wetlands. Rather, wetlands were examined as they related to habitat areas supporting biodiversity. Special types of wetlands, like bogs and vernal pools, were specifically examined. Commissioner Gardow asked for clarification on vernal pools. Mr. Gruner defined them as watercourses based on the criteria of being temporary rather than permanent. He noted that there are many such vernal pools that fill in the fall rather than in the spring, as commonly thought. The members discussed the idea of providing landowners with information on the biodiversity study and ways for them to be responsible stewards of the ecological system. Chairman Loomis thanked Mr. Gruner and Mr. Persons for their time in making this presentation to
the Commission.
PRESENTATION BY HOWARD BEACH, CHAIRMAN, CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS COMMISSION.
Mr. Beach was present to address the Commission. He provided the members with handouts. He opened by stating that the Conservation Commission reviewed the 1994 Plan of Development section on conservation in drafting this handout. Mr. Beach said that the 1994 Plan had many good objectives that were never translated into action due to lack of quantifiable goals. He felt the new Plan should incorporate not so much changes in the objectives, but rather making them more quantifiable. He observed that numerous studies have recently been undertaken, including the Biodiversity study, the Vernal Pool study, and the Impervious Surface study. These have all been done with collaborative efforts and have obtained good scientific data to back them up. Putting together maps and implementation
guides that include data from these studies should give us scientifically defensible tools to implement conservation objectives. Mr. Beach reviewed the handout, noting substantive changes.
The members then asked Mr. Beach questions. They discussed the issue of east-west connectivity, particularly through the Ethel Walker area and around Great Pond. Chairman Loomis asked if anything in the goals and objectives directly addressed the corridors and the issue of connectivity. Mr. Beach stated that without the final biodiversity mapping, that cannot be addressed specifically. He noted, however, that following Best Management Practices (BMPs) should help with that. Commissioner Howard remarked that Policy 7 appeared to be a good place to specifically mention corridors. Laurie Whitten, Conservation Officer, stated that Policy 1, while not explicitly listing corridors, alludes to that issue. Mr. Beach commented that the term “corridor” has been used in the past
and then been abandoned; he felt it would be good to put that term back in. Dick Davis, Simsbury Land Trust, asked if anything that is being learned from these studies suggests that we should create larger buffer areas around streams, etc. Mr. Beach said that presently there are 75ft. buffers, but the Conservation Commission has just updated the regulations and the buffer zones have been changed to 100ft. Chairman Loomis thanked Mr. Beach for his time in making this presentation.
DISCUSSION OF SECTION I-6 (OVERALL PHILOSOPHIES) AND I-13 (THE CHARACTER OF SIMSBURY) OF THE 1994 PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT
Chairman Loomis opened the discussion by noting that he had spoken with Emil Dahlquist, Chairman of the Design Review Board, regarding Design Review’s input on the character of Simsbury. Mr. Dahlquist will respond by May 6th, so the Planning Commission can address the
Planning Commission Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 3
character section further at the May 13th meeting. He then asked the members for their thoughts on the philosophies contained in section I-6. Commissioner Ryan remarked that generally the statements are fine, but there are inherent conflicts (ie, between conservation and economic development) which must be worked out. He felt it would be important to establish clear rules regarding development so people know what to expect, and to find a way to make the town what people want within those guidelines. Commissioner Katz remarked that in writing the Plan, it might be useful to put the philosophy statements in the opening of the chapter to which they relate, as opposed to having all the philosophy statements together in an opening section. Commissioner Howard agreed that might be a good
idea. She also noted the importance in the Plan of being creative rather than restrictive, and stressed the need to be more specific. Commissioner Piecuch agreed with the need for specificity in the Plan. He stated that these philosophies look at the town as a whole, but there may be different philosophies for different parts of town, thus there is the need for more detail. Part of the Commission’s job is to reconcile competing interests while preserving the town’s rural character. There should then be specificity right up front in the opening statements.
Commissioner Cole suggested doing overlays of the various pieces of information (ie, the biodiversity study, etc.), so that the Commission knows what it’s working with. Then the members can begin to determine where different types of development should occur, and what the philosophies should be. She also suggested there should be a philosophy statement specifically about open space. Commissioner Gardow noted that Commissioner Katz’s suggestion of placing the philosophy statements at the head of each section has value. However, he felt there should still be an overall philosophy that needs to be developed further from the information contained in this section now. Commissioner Cole noted that the language used can also be an important tool in expressing philosophy. The
members discussed the issue of zoning, noting that mixed uses, traditional neighborhood design, etc. might be closer to what the town needs today than straight zoning modes. They agreed that there needs to be greater flexibility in zoning, to address different classes of use and to incorporate the idea that there cannot be one rule for everything. The needs of the town aren’t being met in certain areas, and the zoning as is may no longer be working the way it should.
Chairman Loomis remarked briefly on the character section, noting that it is not a dynamic statement of change or direction, but is rather devoid of substance. Commissioner Katz suggested that the implementation of the Plan should be incorporated directly in the main document, rather than in a separate document. Commissioner Howard stated that they could just start from scratch on these philosophies and get more specific, noting that there is a different environment, both physically and economically, than there was when these statements were written.
DISCUSSION OF SIMSBURY LAND TRUST INVITATION FOR BOARD MEMBERSHIP.
The members discussed the idea of a Planning Commission member being on the board of the Simsbury Land Trust. They agreed that this would possibly present a conflict of interest, or at the very least the appearance or such a conflict. Chairman Loomis stated that he would convey to the Land Trust appreciation for the offer, but would politely decline.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 4
UPDATE ON PLAN PRESENTATIONS, COMMUNICATIONS ON THE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Tolisano stated that the Chairman of the Public Building Committee will be making a presentation at the next meeting. He is the last scheduled presenter. Chairman Loomis noted that they may want to ask the local Historic District to make a presentation, and he said he would talk further about this with Mr. Tolisano.
STAFF REPORTS
The members discussed the upcoming Forum, scheduled for May 15th at 7pm in the Simsbury High School Amphitheater. This is being sponsored by the PTO Community Liaison Committee. Ms. Jennifer Simone, of the Liaison Committee, was present to discuss the forum with the members. Chairman Loomis asked the members to each prepare a brief 3-minute overview of one of the sections of the Plan. He asked them to get back to him by the end of the week with their top 3 choices of the section on which they would like to speak. He will then assign each member a section. He asked for copies of their statements by May 2nd. Commissioner Jansen and Commissioner Gardow noted that they have conflicts for May 15th and may not be able to attend the forum. They will
still prepare a statement, which other members can present if they are not at the forum. Ms. Simone stated that questions from the audience will be held until the end of all the statement presentations by the Commissioners. The members discussed format, agreeing that Chairman Loomis will serve as the moderator. Questions from the audience will be directed to him, and he will the identify who should answer and will restate the question; then that person can answer the question. Chairman Loomis will provide Ms. Simone with an outline for the forum as soon as possible.
Regarding the technical documents, the software for the mapping has been ordered but is not in yet. The technician is getting ready to start on the technical document updates. Mr. Tolisano told the members that he and Emil Dahlquist had recently taped a program for SCTV, “About Simsbury,” in which they discussed the Design Guidelines and the Plan of Development. He noted that he mentioned the upcoming forum on this program. Chairman Loomis asked Mr. Tolisano how much is being spent on the mapping software. Mr. Tolisano did not know that figure and indicated he would find out.
CORRESPONDENCE
Commissioner Gardow stated that CRCOG had sent a letter announcing the public forum on the regional Plan. The forum for all member towns west of the Farmington River has been scheduled for May 6th, to be held in Simsbury at Boy Scout Hall.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES of March 25, 2003 and April 8, 2003
Commissioner Gardow made a motion to table the approval of minutes to the next meeting. Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 5
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Ryan made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:05pm. Commissioner Gardow seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
____________________________
Pamela Katz, Secretary
| 
