Planning Commission 03/26/2013 ADOPTED
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 26, 2013
REGULAR MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Michael R. Paine, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices. The following members were present: Richard Cortes, Gary Lungarini, William Rice, Tina E. Hallenbeck, Robert Kulakowski and Kevin Prell. Also in attendance were: Hiram Peck, Director of Planning; Janis Prifti, Commission Clerk; and other interested parties.
Chairman Paine thanked SCTV for taping the meetings for Simsbury residents.
II. SEATING OF ALTERNATES AS NECESSARY
Chairman Paine seated alternate Richard Cortes and Gary Lungarini.
Ferg Jansen joined the meeting at 7:12 p.m.
III. DISCUSSION & POSSIBLE ACTION
a. Application #13-02 of Vera Bruun, Owner, requesting an extension of a re-subdivision approval from March 2008 on property located at 14 Weatherly Road (Map F05, Block 301, Lot 045) and 16 Weatherly Road (Map F05, Block 301, Lot 045). Zone R40.
Mr. Peck stated that the Planning Commission has the authority regarding subdivisions and Staff recommends granting this request for extension. He reviewed the original request was extended for 6 years, as stated by Mr. Beach, but it is important to be careful as they do not want to interpret for the State. He said this request will not make a difference to the Town either way; the Applicant can improve or market the property and this is a reasonable request. The Commissioners noted the original approval date was 3/25/2008.
Commissioner Rice made a motion to approve the Application for the extension of Subdivision #13-02 from March 25, 2013 for a period of five (5) years.
Commissioner Hallenbeck seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
b. Zoning Commission Referral: Incentive Housing Overlay Zone
Mr. Peck stated the Town applied for a grant for the Incentive Housing Overlay Program from Home Connecticut. He said initially Concord Square Consulting surveyed 21 different parcels in Town to see where it would be feasible to locate Incentive Housing Zone developments. He said Incentive Housing Zone (IHZ) legislation was adopted by the Legislature to provide work force available housing for certain income levels. He said the problem with the program came down to locating specific parcels; Zoning was uncomfortable with the State legislation structure of pre-selecting parcels and was more comfortable with a regulation allowing them to look at each application and decide if that location was the right one for that zone. He stated if the parcel is not sub-divided, it would go directly to the Zoning Commission. He said at the time Glenn Chalder took over the project, Zoning wanted to know what other commissions in the State were doing and Mr. Chalder put together a chart listing other towns' activities indicating their interest in a regulation specifically compliant with IHZ and towns not interested pre-selecting sites. He said the Commission then looked at what is being discussed in terms of unit costs and income requirements and Mr. Chalder put together a median family income chart with 80% of mean annual income adjusted for family size, for 1-2-3 bedroom units, with monthly income available for housing between $1300-1800. This is not Section 8 housing; IHZ would house people in Town who could hopefully afford it, if these developments were created. Mr. Chalder developed an historic mortgage rate chart providing background for the types of things all Town committees look at, especially Zoning, about how housing is produced, how affordable it is, and how likely people would move into them once constructed. He provided the Commissioners with copies of all this material and the draft regulation. He said it is important for the Commission to hear how these developments would be different from some in Town that may have caused problems, e.g. affordable units not properly managed or the role of tenants' understanding.
Mr. Peck said Maria DeMarco came in and talked to the Zoning Commission about how she manages these types of units and David Fink from the Partnership of Strong Communities talked about why Simsbury needs these units; SCTV recorded this information. He said Ms. DeMarco allayed a lot of fears about how they would be managed and run. This then allowed Mr. Chalder to put together a comprehensive regulation about the purpose of the zone, the nature of the zone, the process, and description of the districts where they could be put in place, possibly in a mixed use zone. He said a number of things in the regulation discuss the process, and of most interest is the density the regulation allows; specifically how many units per acre under a particular type of density. He said the regulations ensure there are adequate sewage, water supply and utilities to the site. He said the regulation talks about up to 6 units per acre and up to 10 or 20 units in certain cases; there is no requirement for a specific number of units to be constructed in the State legislation; rather those are minimums of 6 units for single family dwellings, a minimum of 10 town houses, or a minimum of 20 apartments or multi-family units. He said many communities, as shown on the survey, decided not to go in that direction and while it is important the Town go in this direction, too much density is not good, and the way the regulation is now constructed is the recommended way to go. He said Zoning has a public hearing date and is anxious to hear from the Planning Commission.
Mr. Peck provided the Commissioners with a series of information regarding how the regulation complies with the POCD, as discussed in the housing chapter on page 117. He said there are a number of important things for Commission consideration: First, as a result of the way housing developed in Simsbury, there has been a lack of diversity in the housing stock; through the Zoning regulations single family residential housing is strictly segregated from other uses and few are within walking distance of commercial areas. He said primary changes in the POCD talk about first enabling greater diversity in the housing stock; and second, allowing mixed use developments, bringing residents to walking and commercial areas. He said a number of goals or objectives apply to the regulation on page 119 to provide a range of housing choices that meet the needs of Simsbury residents of all ages and economic circumstances. Policy #3 on page 121 encourages availability of a range of housing types and densities; even though page 121 cites densities not in the regulation, they think there is enough offsetting information in the rest of the plan to accommodate that. Policy #4 on page 122 to promote housing programs and development efforts that directly benefit residents who have limited economic means and/or limiting physical conditions, including first time home buyers, low income individuals and families, and elderly and handicapped persons, but all these units are not for low income people. Only 20% would be set aside for work force housing, with specific incomes set by HUD regulations. Policy #5 on page 123 is very important to encourage diverse housing patterns where public water and sewers are available, probably in commercial areas, Town center, and other villages where water and sewer are available. He said basically what the POCD says is drafted in a letter for the Commission's approval. An audience member asked if builders would look for land in commercial zones and whether land is available. Mr. Peck explained any available parcel would be available for construction under this zone, but each parcel's eligibility would be evaluated for appropriateness.
Mr. Peck said that today he received a letter from the Town Attorney asking: 1) about eligible zones - the regulation does not specify eligible underlying zones where WHOZ could be applied and it could be applied to any zone. Mr. Peck said that was the intent, but there are certain residential neighborhoods where it might not be appropriate; if it is a zone change, the Zoning Commission will be involved and that is a high bar, but it is important all zones be allowed to have it should it be found to be appropriate, e.g. available business or industrial property or a residential area where small density might be appropriate. His second comment regarded eligibility of parcels, Mr. Peck said that the WHOZ does not specify minimum or maximum lot sizes and the decision to permit it on any size parcel is a policy choice for the Zoning Commission. He said it could be a small parcel and could apply for a number of units on that parcel or it may not be appropriate. He said it allows someone to apply for any parcel and then it is determined whether it is acceptable. He said Bob's third comment regarding the draft regulation allows the Commission discretion to modify any dimensional standard with a 2/3 vote in subdivision regulations; if a particular requirement needed to be modified, a special permit would be required from Zoning. He said the last thing is that review standards for WHOZ require a Zoning map amendment, text amendment, and issuance of a special permit, which is a high bar, but the draft regulation does not reference any standards in the Zoning regulations and Bob suggested a cross-reference to Article 7, Section C, and Article 5, Section J, of the existing regulations to inform applicants of the standards and criteria for considering these for the overlay zone, zoning amendment and special permit. Mr. Peck said he and Mr. Chalder agree that is a valid requirement and the link between existing special permit standards and this regulation is important and should be put in the regulation.
Regarding Dorset Crossing counting as part of this because they have special needs housing, Mr. Peck said it is a PAD rather than IHZ; MS residents will have 40 units and 8 units are for local people with other special needs; for PAD there is no requirement for any affordable units and the intent of this regulation is to provide affordable housing units. He said it is a special Town ordinance allowing the Assessor to assess their income ability and possibly 80% or more could be affordable units. He this particular program said it allows people with less than market rate incomes to fit into 20% of those units. Regarding income eligibility, he said a number of State-approved agencies carefully review income levels of qualified residents for the affordable housing units; the Town does not get involved in that. Mr. Chalder added that before residents can renew their lease, they have to demonstrate eligibility; if they buy the unit and their income increases and they want to sell the unit, there are resale restrictions; if they move to a regular unit, then there are no resale restrictions. He said over time that 20% of units will not escalate in price the same as other units, so its sale price must meet affordability limitations and there is a review on resale. Mr. Peck said if an application comes in for this type of housing, everything is upfront and existing zoning remains. There is a special IHZ process with public hearings, which the State statute did not provide for; the State wanted site plans with no public hearing and many commissions did not want that. Regarding 20% restrictions being the same as restricted deed property resale values, Mr. Peck said Ms. DeMarco talked about how to handle that and the Zoning Commission was very comfortable it would be very tight and professionally well done with income levels validated annually; they do not want a situation involving excessive litigation. He said they would ask a developer managing the system how it would be done and once 1 or 2 are established they would make who manages an IHZ project part of the requirements, and #6 of the proposed regulation talks about that. Mr. Chalder stated the housing restriction in #5 is also tied in, which is acceptable to the Town Attorney. Chairman Paine clarified that the "commission" in the regulation is actually the Zoning Commission; the Planning Commission comments on subdivisions and provides their opinion regarding potential Zoning regulation. Mr. Chalder said the Zoning Commission requested a process giving them control through the Zoning and special permit process, and those would be referred to the Planning Commission for comment providing twice. Regarding an owner renting an income-restricted unit, Mr. Chalder stated that would generally be prohibited; these units are intended to benefit those meeting income restrictions and not as investment properties; the management company would make sure that does not happen. Mr. Peck said that 20% of the units are designated affordable and will be inhabited by people who meet those qualifications and may be rented. Regarding 5.c. and whether a non-profit corporation could own some of these units and rent them out, Mr. Chalder said the language is meant to allow in 30-40 years, if these rentals become condos, that a plan would be submitted to the commission for consideration and he provided the Town with a model for a housing affordability plan. Mr. Chalder said the affordability plan would be reviewed by the Town Attorney and Mr. Peck to ensure objectives are met. Mr. Peck added the term of the deed restriction proposed in the regulation is 30 years. Commissioner Hallenbeck suggested adding "Zoning" in front of "Commission" wherever it appears and Mr. Peck agreed.
Mr. Peck read the 3/26/13 draft regulation requesting the Commission's agreement.
Chairman Paine asked Commissioner Cortes to step down at 7:50 p.m. because Ferg Jansen joined the meeting.
Commissioner Rice asked whether this draft regulation undermines existing regulations, Mr. Peck said it provides another alternative for things the Town has subsequently found desirable, e.g. the Town Center Code has the potential to reinvigorate downtown. He said the PAD has been in existence for a couple of years, including for West Street and Dorset Crossing, was desirable to developers and those areas have not been affected adversely because they were carefully applied. He said it provides flexibility because of needs the Town has; the POCD also identifies the need to diversify housing stock and work force housing is only 20%. He said the Town is still under 8-30G, which gave the Town Meadowood, which has not begun; that is not a process anyone wants to go through again. He said if a developer can come in and find out that what they propose is in the regulations and agreed to and they feel comfortable with it, that is the way they will go rather than file 8-30G. He said getting something desirable with flexibility in the regulations allows them to apply the right tool for the location. Commissioner Jansen noted past discussions of how young people cannot afford to live in Town and this may be one way to get them in; it would be the first such zone in the Farmington Valley. Mr. Chalder confirmed that and added that a new round of grant applications is due this Friday with more towns possibly becoming involved. Mr. Peck said it is important that people understand that the series of steps with Zoning and the permit process are a high bar, but should be included in the regulation. He said until 10% of housing is in the affordable category, the Town is still under 8-30G and providing 20% IHZ affordable housing is a good way to go.
Commissioner Hallenbeck made a motion to give a favorable recommendation for the proposed WHOZ (Workforce Housing Overlay Zone) Regulation.
Commissioner Lungarini seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS
a. Informal discussion regarding subdivision on 46 Hildurcrest Drive
Mr. Peck said a public hearing for this subdivision is set for the next meeting. Andrew Quirk, Professional Engineer at Kratcher, Jones and Associates, represented Paul Meehan, the applicant. Mr. Quirk requested Commission feedback in order to prepare for the public hearing and thanked the Commissioners for time on tonight's agenda. He said this is a 6.2-acre parcel in an R40 zone where presently there is a house and some outbuildings, a well and private sewer. He said the proposal is for a 5-lot subdivision with a Town road, extension of a sanitary sewer, and private wells to serve each home. He said each lot meets regulations except for a couple of issues: 1 buildable area is 4 1/2 feet short of the 10,000 sq. ft. area on Lot 5. He said they felt it was prudent to have 2 lots to the south meet the regulation; the 50-foot right-of-way causes them to request a waiver on 1 lot. He said they worked to minimize the number of lots and meet the buildable area. Second, he said for the proposed open space at the entrance and the 30-foot conservation easement perimeter buffer wooded parcel developed for Murphys Turn, there will be stone walls and features beneficial to preserve by the homeowners association. He said the entrance to the open space would be deeded to maintain the parcel, conforming with regulations and providing an area for streetscape improvements with a decorative sign by the wall and an entrance sign with “Murphys Turn” name, benefitting those in the subdivision and maintaining the streetscape. He said 1.2 acres is conservation easement or 22% of the subdivision total.
Mr. Peck clarified that in an informal, under the statutes, the Commissioners can ask any questions, and neither side is bound by the discussion. Mr. Quirk said the Fire Marshall's approval of the cul de sac is in process. He said the average lot size is 40,000-45,000 sq. ft. and the last 2 lots are 50,000-55,000 sq. ft. He said the lots will have well water, except for the lot on Lawton, which will have public water. Commissioner Rice noted the new subdivision regulations dated 11/15/12. Mr. Quirk said they are familiar with the new regulations and have met with Town Staff several times. He said there are no steep slopes on the property. He said a letter was submitted to Mr. Beach to determine there are no wetlands requiring a Conservation Commission permit. Regarding whether a rectangle fits on the lots, Mr. Peck noted a recent subdivision on Sand Hill where that was allowed. Regarding the proposed open space, Mr. Beach and he met with the Town Attorney and the open space may be part of the Association on the deed to the individual lots. He said the biggest thing is these are not corner lots anymore, as they were designed that way. Mr. Peck asked that the Commissioners let him know before the hearing if there are any questions. Mr. Meehan said it is preferred that the Homeowners’ Association take care of the open space property, due to their experience with 3 different projects to date. Regarding square footage of the houses, Mr. Meehan said it has not been formalized, but looks like 3-4000 sq. ft. in the current market. Mr. Quirk thanked the Commissioners for their feedback and said they would be better prepared for the 4/9 hearing.
b. CRCOG Regional Planning Committee
Commissioner Cortes attended the last CRCOG meeting and said they are updating their POCD with a draft planned for June, work on it throughout the summer, and completion in the fall. He said discussions were quite extensive and recommended Commissioners attend a meeting. He said there is a watershed chapter they are considering how to modify because of UCONN's need for water and they discourage inter-basin transfers of water. He said other things under review include: economic development, education vs. employee needs, funding CSU and community colleges, developing good transit through DOT, expanding New Haven-Hartford-Springfield train intervals to 45 minutes with more stations along the way, other regional transit opportunities including the New Britain bus line, different projects in different towns - Bolton is looking at the issue of sizing solar panel rules for roofs vs. on the ground - Windsor has 4000 units to be built. Commissioner Kulakowski also attended the meeting and said there is a lot of development in Windsor on the commercial side. Mr. Cortes said Manchester is building 240 units in 3-story walkups. He noted the website greenregionct.org is for towns to use when planning and developing with YouTube videos and will be updated going forward. He said there is a special meeting 4/25/13 and the next regular meeting is 5/16/13. Chairman Paine discussed the request that the Commission designate a representative for the rest of the year's meetings. Mr. Peck stated CRCOG meets the 3rd Thursday of every month. Commissioner Hallenbeck offered to take the 4/25/13 special meeting. The Commissioners discussed representation alternatives for CRCOG and will discuss this further at the next meeting.
Commissioner Jansen said he went to the Northeast Transit Conference where the Governor talked about economic development, new cars, the bus way, getting to/from the airport, and with allocation of available funds.
c. Discussion on subdivision approval extensions, re: Subdivision Regulations
Mr. Peck said they will make sure if the Planning Commission is in the process of approving a subdivision that it is important to know how long the approval is for, with expiration noted in the title block so there is no confusion in the future.
V. COMMUNICATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
a. Letter of Support for Recreational Trail Grant Application
Mr. Peck said the draft letter is for the Baker property near the Performing Arts Center; the Town is applying for a regional trail grant on Thursday to recover and renovate existing trails; some areas are easy to pass through and some are quite wet and require work. Mr. Sawitzke is putting together a cost plan to put the trail through. He said it is a great area for the 5K run without closing streets - it is not quite 1.3 miles around. He provided the Commissioners with a draft letter to Laurie Giannotti talking about the property and constructing a non-motorized trail, allowing for maintenance and restoration of historic trails, providing for nature study by students, and a trail system accessible from Town Center. He said letters of support are also requested from the Conservation Commission, CRCOG, and the Farmington River Watershed Association. He said the surface will probably be a cinder, as the area floods and they want to ensure the trail remains. Mr. Peck stated whether the Senior Center is eventually located at the Performing Arts Center will have no effect and would be a great area for them to walk.
Commissioner Jansen made a motion approving sending the Letter of Support to DEEP.
Commissioner Lungarini seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
Regarding the proposed Stormwater Policy, Mr. Peck would appreciate a vote at the next meeting. He said the Zoning Commission has adopted the policy and this stormwater guideline is suggested to developers. He said the plan is to adopt it as a policy first and work out the kinks so it will become a regulation. Chairman Paine requested it be on the next meeting's agenda for a vote.
Mr. Peck said that 2 people went to the CT Bar Association Land Use Seminar in Middletown; the first discussion was on Planning Commissions and they were provided copies of their planning section. Commissioner Jansen agreed it was an excellent and invigorating conference from 8 a.m.-4:30 p.m. and all sections were very informative. Commissioner Kulakowski agreed it was very informative and engaging with a lot of information provided. Commissioner Jansen said there were many court cases cited in the book revealing how commissions have evolved.
Chairman Paine said the First Selectman is reconvening the Charrette subcommittee to deal with use of the Hartford Insurance property. He said the Board of Finance, Zoning Commission, Planning Commission, Economic Development Commission, Design Review Board, Conservation Commission or their designees will be on the subcommittee. He is attending the 1st meeting and will update the Commissioners; they may end up with a Charrette for the southern end of Town and will see where it goes. Mr. Peck said the first meeting is set for 4/4/13
VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of March 12, 2013
On Line 11, "Hiram Peck, Director of Planning" is corrected to "Howard Beach, Conservation Officer".
Commissioner Hallenbeck made a motion to approve the March 12, 2013, Meeting Minutes as amended.
Commissioner Lungarini seconded the motion, and it was passed with Commissioner Hallenbeck abstaining.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Jansen made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:40 p.m. Commissioner Rice seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
_____________________________
Michael R. Paine, Chairman