Planning Commission Minutes 09/09/2014 ADOPTED
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 9, 2014
REGULAR MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Ferg Jansen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices. The following members were present: Alan Needham, Richard Cortes, William Rice, Mark Drake, Robert Kulakowski, and Kevin Prell. Also in attendance were Hiram Peck, Director of Planning, Rachel Blatt, Assistant Town Planner, Janis Prifti, Commission Clerk, and other interested parties.
II. SEATING OF ALTERNATES
A quorum was present and no alternates were seated.
III. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Application #14-01 of Ed Lally and Associates, Inc., Agent; Randy E. and Shelly Swinford, Owners, requesting re-subdivision of the property located at 5 Pinnacle Mountain Road (Map H11, Block 106, Lot 001) to create 2 lots. Zone R-40.
Application #14-01 was read into the record.
Town Staff received an email today from the First Selectman indicating neighbors have asked that this hearing be continued to allow further time for their review of the Application. Additionally, the Applicant failed to post a required sign in front of the property.
Chairman Kulakowski made a motion to continue the Public Hearing to the next meeting.
Commissioner Prell seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
IV. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION
a. CGS 8-3a Referral for Zoning Application #14-37 of Robin Messier Pearson, Esq., for K & K Developers, Inc., Applicant; INFINITY IV, LLD, Owner; for a Zone Change from I-1 to I-1 and PAD on the property located at 34 Hopmeandow Street (Map E18, Block 117, Lot 001). Zone I-1.
Application #14-37 was read into the record.
Town Staff reviewed that Application #14-37 is a referral to the Zoning Commission and will also have a Public Hearing before the Conservation Commission regarding wetlands and environmental issues. The Commissioners were provided copies of 8-3 statutes pertaining to this Application and the pertinent section of the POCD.
The Applicant's engineer discussed existing conditions and the program and how it conforms to the POCD. This was the former River Oaks parcel and the Applicant has applied for a PAD zone for the 60-acre parcel. The location adjacent to Avon was described; the property is primarily an open field with the existing CL&P location remaining in the middle of the site; there are 2 parcels that would be further divided; the only real vegetation onsite is at the CL&P drainage easement ditch used for parking lot runoff. The Applicant discussed the local team working for the Applicant, Garden Homes of New Jersey, which has built over 40,000 homes in the northeast and nationally and has developed a number of sizeable projects in Connecticut. A full market assessment and fiscal impact analysis for the Parcel 1B project will be presented to the Economic Development Commission in 2 days.
The Applicant's engineer indicated the POCD provided 2 approaches to developing this parcel; the preferred approach is as Zoned, I-2 office and industrial; the second alternative approach with well-defined clear desirable performance objectives is what they will follow. The neighboring areas were described to include mixed use retail/residential in nearby Avon, multi-family on the west side of Hopmeadow Street, substantial office complexes on both sides of the site, and the Nod Brook State Wildlife area; a key component would be the abutting Farmington River Bike Trail which is intended to be a true feature of the proposed development attracting bike users to the mobility system. The Rte. 10 Corridor Study called for maintaining Rte. 10 as a 2-lane road in light of potential development in Simsbury; Fuss & O'Neill performed that Study and also worked on the former River Oaks plan for this property and as part of this team, they have a lot of good data and have updated it for this project. In general, the Garden Homes master plan is less than 1/2 the density of the former River Oaks proposal.
The POCD design tenets include a thoroughly prepared Master Plan; open space as a key characteristic of the proposal; extensive analysis of view corridors that continue ridge line visibility after project build out; connectivity to the bike trail and other areas of Simsbury, Avon and beyond; and a series of proposed mixed uses, including housing which would be built as part of the 1st phase of the project. Desirable performance objectives from the POCD will be addressed as the proposal is presented and were broken into design context, functional areas, form and content, roads, architecture, and streetscape. A series of cross-sections from Blue Ridge and Meadow Plain were analyzed by the Applicant to determine how far 1, 2, or 3-story buildings would have to be located to preserve terminal ridge line views from Hopmeadow Street. A purpose of the PAD would be to lock in the architecture and scale the Town desires for developers of future project phases and roof line approximations were shown on the layout. Photos of overgrown pine tree vegetation at CL&P's 1-story building were shown and would remain as is; a better ridge line view was shown demonstrating a 3-story office building off this property in the back - this is important as they are also proposing some 3-story buildings set far back in the site and those roofs would not be greater than 50 feet tall. Additional ridge views were shown to the Commissioners moving north toward Old Meadow Plain Road where terminal ridge views would be maintained. It was noted removal of some of the property's scrub brush along Hopmeadow Street could open up additional views.
In describing the development diagram, the green represented 150-200 feet of unobstructed open space between Hopmeadow Street and the nearest building; that open space would be augmented by common open space systems forming axial views of the terminal view sheds from Blue Ridge and Old Meadow. The blue areas demonstrated where a 1-story building could be placed without obstructing views to the ridge line top; a 4th graphic line was for 3-story buildings. Their Master Plan segmented the property into 3 parcels: 1) the primary housing component located on about 14 acres; 2) mixed use parcels with a 6.2 acre parcel on the south; and 3) another 5.73 acres parcel on the north located across the real property; the remainder would probably be single use ownership and a potential future subdivision. Garden Homes, as the owner of Parcel 1B and its access way, will return to the Commission with a subdivision proposal for 3 lots for the southern 6.2 acre parcel, if the zone change is successful. The existing zoning change application is for 2 properties on the whole 60 acres with potential commercial applications anticipated in the future that must follow the approved Master Plan. It was noted that under the current zone, office buildings could be placed within 40 feet of Hopmeadow Street. Town Staff explained if the PAD were approved and a developer came in with a significantly different idea, they would have to go back through the whole zone change process. However, if an applicant conformed to the approved zone Master Plan, they could reasonably expect to move ahead.
The Applicant's engineer explained that Parcel 1A would be a future commercial parcel with about 51,000 sq. ft. of mixed uses in 2 stories and those buildings are closer to Hopmeadow Street because the existing wetland trees already obscure views to the mountain. Moving north, Parcel 1C would have about 24,000 sq. ft. of 1-story buildings. Parcel 2's total 33 acres contains the existing CL&P facility of about 49,000 sq. ft. and would have about 91,000 sq. ft. of additional area for mixed use with two 1-story buildings and a 2-story building set far back in the site and not obstructing the view. The Commissioners recalled CL&P's previous concerns regarding the bike path allowing access to material on CL&P's site. The Applicant's engineer confirmed CL&P leases the parcel and believed they would take precautions to protect their storage area.
Referring to the POCD open space requirement, there would be about 39% or about 24 acres of open space, including a passive village green between 150-200 feet wide maintaining Hopmeadow's pastoral character; other open space on the site would relate to uses and the storm water management system where they anticipate infiltration primarily onsite given the good soils; and there would be open space between the buildings and parking areas.
An enlargement layout of the Garden Homes parcel was provided to the Commissioners explaining that the front commercial pieces would not be built as part of this Application; the rear part of the parcel would be built including lower density lower buildings in the front for visual reasons and in compliance with the POCD tenet for transitional housing to the lower density houses across Hopmeadow Street. The lower density housing would include 2 1/2 story houses in front, the next layer would be 2-story apartments, and at about 900 feet back the 3-story buildings begin. Large tracts of open space would break down parking areas with about half of onsite parking being on the street; and in compliance with the POCD, almost every ground floor unit would have direct street access. The club house and swimming pool area were shown with the primary green space oriented toward accessing the bike path.
The Commissioners were shown the character of the architecture proposed for the buildings which would likely include some brownstone finishing on the lower areas. The 3-story buildings would have 30 units, and the 2-story units would have 12 units. They currently estimate 1.78 parking spaces per residential unit and 4 spaces per 1000 for the mixed use, once mixed use begins to be built out the overall count could be reduced. Residential street parking would be parallel and diagonal with no large parking areas; in addition to the 24 acres of open space, about another 13% of residential parking would be reserved for green space. The large building on the northern parcel would be about 40,000 sq. ft. single story and could potentially be for a small grocer.
Regarding traffic and in compliance with the POCD requirement to maintain Hopmeadow's 2-lane road, this project would not require road widening, except for 2 left turn lanes 100 feet long. Not until the full Master Plan is built out would they meet the State traffic warrants for a signal to be put in at Blue Ridge Drive; however, a signal at this location could beneficially stagger traffic. Garden Homes believes this project complies with POCD's desirable performance objectives for developers to meet including, vistas, open space, variety of housing options, building styles and heights, mixed uses for the overall Master Plan, access management, internal connectivity reducing curb cuts on Hopmeadow Street, connectivity and walkability for the entire site and to the bike path and Town Center. Regarding public access to the bike path, it was noted there currently is access through the Nod Brook Wildlife area.
The Applicant's engineer summarized this project conforms to both the PAD additional evaluation criteria and the POCD with continued future discussions with the Commission planned.
The Commissioners discussed the view from Blue Ridge to the mountain and the gap between the 2-story buildings to the south and areas allowing a full view. It was confirmed that the 2 1/2-story buildings would have a dormer on the 3rd floor for a bedroom. Regarding the open space, Town Staff confirmed it would be 20% of the original parcel or fee in lieu of open space; also, the wetlands are a portion of open space depending on how large they are - the Commissioners will be provided that information. Responsibility to enforce open space maintenance would be an issue for further discussion; typically, it is defined at the time of proposed subdivision. The distance between the bike path and 3-story building would be about 70 feet.
Regarding whether there is a viable market for the 181 units proposed in light of recently approved apartment units in neighboring towns, the Applicant's engineer confirmed their analysis took those recently approved units into consideration as part of Garden Homes marketing study before moving forward. Following their recent informal presentation to the Design Review Board and Zoning Commission, the Applicant's engineer summarized some of these same market analysis questions came up and the Zoning Commission Chairman commented that Garden Homes has a substantive presence in Connecticut, understands the market, and is willing to make this investment. The Commissioners noted there have been a number of applications in recent months.
Regarding timing for this referral, Town Staff confirmed the Zoning Commission hearing for this Application is scheduled for 10/6/2014 and the Planning Commission has an interim meeting on 9/23/2014. Town Staff noted the Planning Commission's primary statutory responsibility to discuss the POCD and any other recommendations deemed relevant. Prior to the 9/23/2014 meeting, Town Staff would coordinate providing any further information requested by the Commissioners. Regarding open space in the total parcel, Town Staff indicated that would be 9.92 acres of about 26 acres, but wetlands and buffer disturbance would be separate. The Applicant's engineer indicated the wetlands are a small linear ditch with the Upland Review Area located 100 feet away.
The Commissioners discussed their concerns regarding future subdivisions and open space. As the front two parcels would not be developed at this time, Town Staff noted the proposed open space would be considered as a minimum and any proposed change to reduce open space for those parcels would return to the Commission for review and approval. Town Staff felt a quick build out of projects approved is unlikely. The 34 Hopmeadow Street property is the only number assigned to the property owner for CL&P's facility; vacant lots are not typically given a number by the Town Assessor.
The Commissioners agreed they needed more time to review the material presented and decided to take no action on Application #14-37 at this meeting; the Commissioners will provide any questions to Town Staff by 9/15/2014 for a coordinated inquiry and response.
V. COMMUNICATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
Rachel Blatt, the new Assistant Town Planner was introduced to the Commissioners and will eventually act as conservation officer. Ms. Blatt reviewed her education and experience, including: undergrad at Barnard in New York in Architecture and Urban Studies, Masters in City Planning at MIT, worked in Germany for a consulting company doing planning in the Middle East, and worked last year in Enfield.
At the next meeting, Town Staff plans to provide a requested apartment analysis to the Commissioners.
VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of July 22, 2014
Commissioner Rice made a motion to approve the July 22, 2014, minutes, as submitted.
Commissioner Prell seconded the motion, and it was passed with Commissioner Kulakowski abstaining.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Jansen thanked SCTV and Ken for recording this evening's meeting.
Commissioner Prell made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:15 p.m.
Commissioner Kulakowski seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
_____________________________
Mark Drake, Secretary