Zoning Commission 11/19/2012 ADOPTED

ZONING COMMISSION - REGULAR MEETING
ADOPTED MINUTES
NOVEMBER 19, 2012

I. CALL TO ORDER
Robert Pomeroy, Chairman, called the regular meeting for the Simsbury Zoning Commission to order at 7:00PM on Monday, November 19, 2012 in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices. The following members and alternates were present: Will Fiske, Edward Pabich, Ed Cosgrove, David Ryan, Vaughn Marecki and Derek Peterson. Others in attendance included Hiram Peck, Director of Planning, and other interested parties.

II. ALTERNATES
Commissioner Pomeroy appointed Commissioner Cosgrove for Commissioner Salls and Commissioner Marecki for Commissioner Post.

III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the October 15, 2012 Regular Meeting & June 4, 2012 Special Joint Meeting with Design Review Board
Commissioner Pomeroy adopted the October 15, 2012 Regular Meeting minutes with one change presented by Commissioner Pabich. Then Commissioner Pomeroy adopted the June 4, 2012 Special Joint Meeting with Design Review Board minutes as presented.

I. PUBLIC HEARING(s)
Commissioner Pabich read the legal notice regarding the following application into record:
Application #12-41 of Lawrence J. Kiel, Agent for Farmington Valley Jewish Congregation Emek Shalom, Owner, for a Special Exception pursuant to Article 10, Section H, of the Simsbury Zoning Regulations for a temporary liquor permit on the property located at 55 Bushy Hill Road.

Larry Kiel addressed the Commission and gave a brief description of the auction event they are holding and described the wine tasting that will be part of the event. Mr. Kiel said the wine tasting will be run by Super Cellars and the serving of the wine will be supervised by experienced servers. Mr. Kiel said this event has been successfully held at the Synagogue in the past. Commissioner Fiske asked about the experience of the servers and Mr. Kiel said all of the servers have experience. When Commissioner Marecki asked if there would be any minors in attendance, Mr. Kiel said it is not likely that minors will be at the event.

Commissioner Cosgrove made a motion to close the Public Hearing. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Fiske and passed unanimously.

Commissioner Cosgrove made a motion to amend the agenda in order to vote on Application #12-41 immediately. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Marecki and passed unanimously.

Commissioner Pabich suggested handling these types of requests administratively when an annual event has a proven track record of holding the event in a controlled manner. This point was discussed by the Commission members.

Commissioner Pabich made a motion for approval of Application #12-41 of Lawrence J. Kiel, Agent for Farmington Valley Jewish Congregation Emek Shalom, Owner, for a Special Exception pursuant to Article 10, Section H, of the Simsbury Zoning Regulations for a temporary liquor permit on the property located at 55 Bushy Hill Road for the date of March 9th (with snow date of March 16th). The motion was seconded by Commissioner Fiske and passed unanimously.

V. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ANY AGENDA ITEM INCLUDING:
a) Discussion of proposed Amendment to Zoning Regulation for Marijuana: Palliative Use; Dispensaries; Producers

Commissioner Pomeroy spoke about the timing of this process and the regulations on which the Zoning Commission will be focusing. He continued to say the Commission is looking for feedback from the public on this issue. Commissioner Pomeroy said the Commission’s challenge is to protect the citizens of the Town, so the process needs to be navigated wisely. He then asked if there were any comments from those in the audience.

Mr. Charles Wolfe, Simsbury, asked about the land in town that could be potential growing and asked if Town property would be used for the growing of marijuana. Mr. Peck said it is likely that the Town will probably not be involved in the growing process, even though some of our land is suitable for that purpose. He spoke of the high permitting fees and security issues involved with growing marijuana.

Mr. Peck continued to say the rules on who can be a producer will not be drafted by the State until July 2013, and while they are doing that, Towns are looking at regulations that would be appropriate to put in place. The maximum number of allowable producers (up to 10 licenses will be granted throughout the state of CT) was discussed by Mr. Peck and the Commission members. The timing of this process was discussed further, and Commissioner Pomeroy said at this point in the process, the Zoning Commission is interested in getting feedback from the public on their thoughts regarding this issue.  Commissioner Marecki asked how the Commission can get feedback from not only the public, but also the businesses that could potentially be involved in this industry. Commissioner Pomeroy said he thinks the Commission needs to be somewhat compassionate to the fact that the State has deemed it appropriate to approve this and reiterated that the Commission needs to be thoughtful throughout this entire process. Commissioner Cosgrove said Colorado and Washington should also be taken into consideration, as their restrictions were recently even further relaxed. This point was discussed further briefly.

Commissioner Pomeroy encouraged citizens to share their thoughts on this issue with the Commission.

b) Discussion with consultant regarding the Incentive Housing Opportunity Zone alternatives available to the Town of Simsbury. Possible direction for study completion.

Glenn Chalder, AICP, Planimetrics - addressed the commission and reviewed a handout distributed to the Commissioners (Summary of IHZ Program Activities). Mr. Chalder said he thought it would be productive to discuss some of these different approaches and went into some detail on a few of the towns listed on the handout. He then gave a brief overview of the process thus far with Simsbury specifically. When asked about the previous potential sites, Commissioner Pomeroy said that each of the previously proposed sites, there was one issue or another that made the approval difficult. At that point, he continued, they were not comfortable with any of those sites, so it was delayed. Commissioner Pomeroy said while the Commission likes the idea of the Incentive Housing and are still interested in the concept, none of the originally proposed properties made sense. Mr. Chalder said he would suggest that this is set up as an overlay zone so it does not replace or eliminate the underlying zone, and areas can be identified as appropriate, essentially allowing spot zoning. Commissioner Peterson asked if a single family lot can be spot zoned and Mr. Chalder said yes, it can be, and they could control the density at that location and reinforce the character of that neighborhood. Mr. Chalder continued by saying he would not suggest the Commission find locations at which the planned housing is inconsistent with the neighborhood. Commissioner Marecki asked about the process of identifying sites and communicating with land owners within that potential overlay zone, which was discussed. When asked for a model program within CT, Mr. Chalder said it matters what the ultimate goal for Simsbury is, because different towns have accomplished different things with their IHZs.  Commissioner Marecki asked about the other initial potential sites and Mr. Peck said there were a variety of reasons that made each of those sites fall out.

Commissioner Pomeroy said he does not see the strong pull to reach to the full aspirations of the IHZ and he does not see Simsbury getting to the full aspirations. Commissioner Fiske added that current residents were questioning the unknown factor of what these developments/projects would look ultimately like. Mr. Chalder said there are ways to provide the potential for density to appropriate areas of Town by creating the overlay zone, while still controlling the process. Commissioner Pabich asked if other towns had involved their Housing Authority.

Commissioner Marecki asked if there is a risk on waiting and Mr. Chalder said at some point, the State will ask for their money back if no progress is made. He did say there is no need to press ahead to adoption, but they can consider a few sites and look at different strategies for those specific locations.  The Commissioners spoke about potential next steps in this process. Commissioner Peterson said he thinks they should let the PAD and Town Center Zones take shape prior to adding Incentivized Housing into the mix.

Commissioner Ryan expressed his concern regarding the creation of "floating zones", along with other aspects of the IHZ, especially when there is no one in front of the Commission asking for this. Mr. Chalder said if the Commission can get a regulation on the books or identify some sites, they are communicating that Simsbury is open to the idea. Commissioner Pabich asked if they could get word out to land owners that the Commission would be willing to entertain the concept in general, without drafting the actual regulation. Mr. Chalder spoke about options moving forward, including drafting a regulation allowing for a Planned Development District.

In order to provide some background, Mr. Peck said this all started with the goal of providing some sort of workforce housing, after a survey showed very few of the employees, at the major businesses in town, were able to live in Simsbury. The topic of buyers versus renters was discussed. Mr. Peck said a regulation could be crafted with the goal of densifying the village areas.  Commissioner Cosgrove asked about the need for additional housing, considering the current real estate market and development in process already.

Commissioner Pomeroy said the Commission should re-examine the regulations already drafted. Mr. Chalder said he would like to put three (3) different options together, providing a menu of options.  Commissioner Ryan asked about the source of funds for the work being done on this topic, which was discussed, and it was concluded that the funds had already been allocated for this topic.  Mr. Peck said they are at a decision point on whether or not to move forward in this process. Commissioner Peterson suggested the idea of incorporating this into the PAD Zone, rather than have it be its own zone, which was discussed.  Commissioner Pomeroy said he would be interested in seeing the previously-mentioned options from Mr. Chalder, as they didn't particularly like the language previously proposed in the process.

Nancy Haase, Board of Selectmen, brought up the issue of resale price on these IHZ properties, which the Commission said was an issue last time.

c) Application #12-42 John D. Ritson, Member of RC Connectors, LLC, Owner, for a Site Plan Amendment for the addition of 16 garages on property located at 144-146 Hopmeadow Street, Weatogue.

Mr. Ritson addressed the Commission, presenting a site plan of the proposed plan, including the garages on the north boundary side of the property. Mr. Ritson said Design Review Board was unanimous in its approval of the design. Mr. Ritson spoke about some of the site specifications. Commissioner Pomeroy asked if there were any additional changes from the previously-approved plan and Mr. Ritson said there are additional parking spaces and described some other very minor changes. Commissioner Pomeroy asked about the unit sizes, which Mr. Ritson reviewed. Mr. Ritson spoke of his expectations on the demand for the covered parking space.  Mr. Peck said this plan complies within the zoning regulations. When asked about the landscape design, Mr. Ritson said the landscaping has not changed at all from the originally-approved plan. Mr. Ritson said there is a future proposed sign, for which he will go through DRB when he gets to that point in the process. Mr. Ritson said these are all separate bays and he needed them for marketing purposes. Mr. Ritson then spoke about their covered bike storage they added.

Commissioner Pabich made the motion that Application #12-42 was reviewed by the Zoning Commission on November 19, 2012 and is found to be in compliance with the applicable regulations based on the following:
1. The applicant has received all applicable permits and variances as noted in the staff report.
2. The applicant has previously received approval from the Zoning Commission for the apartment building. This approval included landscaping and grading plans for the entire site.
3. The current plan date November 15, 2012 shows the proposed garage structures for 16 vehicles.
Therefore given the above application #12-42 is hereby approved with the following requirements:
All construction is required to be done in accordance with approved plans including:
a. All previous requirements, including exterior lighting and complete site landscaping all grading and complete stormwater management basins as shown and as approved.
b. All recommendations made by the Design Review Board in its approval of November 13, 2012 regarding the garage exteriors and garage lighting as presented.
c. All previously approved building materials including previously approved exterior building materials are to be used as shown on approved plans.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Fiske and was unanimously approved.

d. Proposed 2013 Meeting Schedule
The proposed 2013 Meeting Schedule was adopted as presented.

VI. OTHER MATTERS AS MAY PROPERLY BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE COMMISSION
Mr. Peck notified the Commission that Town Staff has been revising the Land Use Fee Schedule and passed out the proposed modifications. Mr. Peck said this year, they are $5,300 in the red due to the fact that the Town pays the application fees, which Town Staff feels, should come from the applicant. Mr. Peck said they also think the applicant should pay for the costs for any legal notices required. He said those legal notices costs $6,000-$7,000 per year. Mr. Peck explained the additional proposed fee changes. He then said Town Staff suggests individuals that knowingly avoid paying the required permit fees, prior to doing the work, be subject to triple the original fee as penalty. Commissioner Cosgrove said triple fee penalties have been a successful deterrent in other areas. Mr. Peck would like to get an endorsement from the Zoning Commission prior to bringing it in front of Board of Selectmen. Mr. Peck reminded everyone that they are just covering costs, not trying to profit from these changes.

Commissioner Pabich made a motion to endorse the revised Land Use Fee Schedule presented by Mr. Peck. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cosgrove and passed unanimously.

VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Pabich moved to adjourn the November 19, 2012 Regular Meeting of the Zoning Commission at 8:35PM. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ryan and passed unanimously.

Respectfully submitted,

____________________________
Robert Pomeroy, Chairman