Zoning Commission Minutes 11/17/2014
ZONING COMMISSION - REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 PM
MINUTES – SUBJECT TO VOTE OF APPROVAL
NOVEMBER 17, 2014
I. CALL TO ORDER
Commissioner Robert Pomeroy called the regular meeting for the Zoning Commission to order at 7:07 P.M. on Monday, November 11, 2014 in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices located at 933 Hopmeadow Street, Simsbury, CT. The following members were present: Ed Cosgrove, Jackie Battos, Kevin Gray, Derek Peterson and Dave Ryan. Others in attendance included Hiram Peck, Director of Planning and other interested parties.
II. APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES
Commissioner Pomeroy appointed Commissioner Cosgrove for Commissioner Marecki and Commissioner Battos for Commissioner Post.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes from October 20, 2014 Regular Meeting were adopted as submitted with minor changes (as noted below) from Commissioners Ryan and Gray.
Change "Shoenhardt" to "Schoenhardt" in the following lines: 42,106,110, and 137
Line 141 and 142 should to read as follows:
...by 11/24/2014). The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gray. Commissioners Ryan, Gray and Pomeroy voted in favor of the application.
Line 143 should read as follows:
....therefore the motion failed.
IV. PUBLIC HEARING(s)
1. Application #14-44 of John Evans, Agent for E and A/I and G Simsbury Commons LP, Owner for a Special Exception pursuant to Article Ten, Section C.3i, of the Town of Simsbury Zoning Regulations for an additional wall sign for The Zoo on the property located at 530 Bushy Hill Rd. (Map B20, Block 508, Lot 001-B). Zone B-3 (received 11/17/2014; public hearing must close by 12/22/2014).
Commissioner Pomeroy stated that Application #14-44 is adjourned until subsequent Zoning Commission meetings.
2. Application #14-45 of Sarah Mutarelli, Agent for St. Mary’s Church, Owner, for a Special Exception pursuant to Article Ten, Section H, for a temporary liquor permit for a one-day event on the property located at 946 Hopmeadow Street (Map H08, Block 227, Lot 002). Zone R-15 (received 11/17/2014; public hearing must close by 12/22/2014).
Ms. Sarah Mutarelli stated that St. Mary’s Church is holding a fundraiser on December 6, 2014 from 6:00 pm – 9:00 pm. The event is titled “Red, White and Brew…with Bidding Too” and will be held inside the parish center. Food and alcohol will be provided by local establishments. The event will include server tips (trained servers).
2. Commissioner Ryan moved to close the public hearing for Application #14-45 of Sarah Mutarelli, Agent for St. Mary’s Church, Owner, for a Special Exception pursuant to Article Ten, Section H, for a temporary liquor permit. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gray and was unanimously approved.
Commissioner Pomeroy moved to amend the agenda to vote on Application #14-45 of Sarah Mutarelli. Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion and was unanimously approved.
2. Commissioner Gray moved to approve Application #14-45 of Sarah Mutarelli, Agent for St. Mary’s Church, Owner, for a Special Exception pursuant to Article Ten, Section H, for a temporary liquor permit for a one-day event on the property located at 946 Hopmeadow Street (Map H08, Block 227, Lot 002). Zone R-15 (received 11/17/2014; public hearing must close by 12/22/2014). The motion was seconded by Commissioner Peterson and was unanimously approved.
V. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION
1. Application #14-37 of Robin Messier Pearson, Esq., for K & K Developers, Inc., Agent/Applicant; Mark Greenberg, INFINITY IV, LLC, Owner; for a Zone Change from I-1 to PAD on property located at 34 Hopmeadow Street, approximately 60 acres on the easterly side of Hopmeadow Street between the Avon Town line and Tower Office Park (Map E18, Block 117, Lot 001). Zone I-1. (received 9/15/2014; public hearing closed 10/20/2014; decision must be rendered by 12/24/2014).
Mr. Peck said that he provided the Commission with a draft motion dated November 12, 2014. For the record, Mr. Peck stated that Commissioners Pomeroy, Gray, Ryan, Cosgrove and Battos are seated for this application and were present at both public hearings. Commissioner Marecki was not present at this meeting. Mr. Peck added that Commissioner Peterson was present at one public hearing. For the record, Mr. Peterson said that he stated at the last meeting that he watched the entire public hearing on SCTV. Mr. Peck stated that the six members present are seated for this application.
Commissioner Pomeroy asked the Commissioners to provide comments to the application:
Commissioner Ryan began by stating that the Commission has approved 498 multifamily units in the last few years and there are 400 +/_ being developed in Avon. He is fearful that the Commission is permitting so many apartments that the “rural character” of the town will be destroyed. Commissioner Ryan said that the problem with the PAD regulation is that it encourages the conversion of commercial and industrial property into multifamily residences. He feels that the multifamily use of the property is the highest and best use. Although there might be an argument that the commercial component of the PAD is improbable, it is unsupportable. The applicant has made a responsible PAD proposal and answered the objections of the Simsbury Boards and Commissions. Commissioner Ryan concluded with stating that he will vote to accept the application with staff recommendations (Item 3, A-H on page 3 of 4) submitted November 12, 2014 included as conditions for approval.
Commissioner Peterson took into consideration all the other Boards and their recommendations. His biggest concern is that the vistas are preserved. Other than the setbacks of buildings, he would like to have a more definitive explanation in order for everyone to feel comfortable that the vistas will be preserved.
Commissioner Pomeroy stated that the applicant has gone above and beyond with responding to our questions of the vistas. The Commission will ensure the vistas are preserved during the site plan phase. He reminded the Commissioners that are our job is to ask if the owner proposed an application that is largely consistent with what was intended according to the PAD. A great deal of work has been done on this project and the applicant listened to the feedback of all Boards and Commissions.
Commissioner Gray thinks that this is a good PAD application. He would like to add workforce housing to the conditions of approval. Also, the applicant agreed they would do sidewalks along Route 10 and it wasn’t specifically mentioned in Mr. Peck’s handout (Item 3, A-L on page 3 of 4 dated Nov. 12, 2014). Commissioner Gray added that he is in favor of the application.
Commissioner Pomeroy answered Commissioner Peterson question if workforce housing was part of the agreement. Commissioner Pomeroy said that the topic of workforce housing has been discussed and it is understood that if workforce housing was made a condition, the applicant would agree.
Commissioner Battos said that she feels this is a very good application and that the applicant has been very responsive to the Zoning Commission and also to the other Boards and Commissions. She is in favor of the application.
Commissioner Cosgrove said he is opposed to the application. He said that not too long ago “over 55” housing was in vogue and some projects never finished because the times changed. He feels that the apartments are changing the nature of this valley. Commissioner Cosgrove added that if people want to live in apartments, move to Bloomfield or Rocky Hill.
The Commissioners discussed adding workforce housing as part of the application. Commissioner Ryan said that the Town doesn’t get credit towards the 10 % regulation for having workforce housing if it isn’t deed restricted.
Commissioner Pomeroy said that he agrees with Commissioner Peterson that we haven’t put emphasis on workforce housing for previous projects. He made a strong suggestion that the developer makes workforce housing available. Commissioner Pomeroy added that it may not meet the goal, but it would put a priority on the topic going forward.
Commissioner Gray said that if you don’t chip away at the 10% with each new development, the Town won’t achieve its goal. He feels that this is an appropriate time to put the requirement in place.
At this time, Commissioner Pomeroy read out loud the list of conditions suggested by Staff, (Item 3, A-L on page 3 of 4 dated Nov. 12, 2014).
Mr. Peck stated for the record the following six (6) findings are part of the PAD regulations:
The standards, requirements and required findings contained in this Article have been met.
The developer has provided, where appropriate, for the sustained maintenance of the development in general, and also for the open space or public amenities in accordance with Section Five above.
Utilities, drainage and recreational facilities have been physically laid out as not to unduly burden the capacity of such facilities, such other facilities presently connected therewith, and such facilities proposed by the adopted Town Plan of Conservation and Development.
The streets, roads, drives and blocks will be suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic and increased densities will not generate traffic in such amounts as to overload the existing or proposed street network in the area.
The capacity of the existing or proposed utility services are adequate for the proposed development.
The development will be in keeping with the purpose and intent of this Article as defined in Section One, the general public interest and the comprehensive plan.
Mr. Peck said the Town wants Rte. 10 to remain as a two-lane configuration as much as possible. However, the applicant will have to go through the DOT process since it is a DOT highway.
1. Commissioner Gray moved approve Application #14-37 of Robin Messier Pearson, Esq., for K & K Developers, Inc., Agent/Applicant; Mark Greenberg, INFINITY IV, LLC, Owner; for a Zone Change from I-1 to PAD on property located at 34 Hopmeadow Street, approximately 60 acres on the easterly side of Hopmeadow Street between the Avon Town line and Tower Office Park (Map E18, Block 117, Lot 001). Zone I-1. (received 9/15/2014; public hearing closed 10/20/2014; decision must be rendered by 12/24/2014). Approval of the application is based upon the following conditions:
The application is in keeping with the POCD and meets the five “fundamental tenets” as found on page 93 of the 2007 POCD as determined by the Planning Commission.
Master Plan view protections as contained in the application submission materials are sufficient. The applicant’s guidelines as proposed to protect the view shed are acceptable and shall be used for any future applications for this 60 acre site.
Building height restrictions as contained in the application are clear and adequate.
Building setbacks from Hopmeadow Street are adequate as shown on the submitted Master Plan.
Garage relocations as suggested by Staff are adequate and provide for a buffer between the residential use and industrial use by Northeast Utilities to the north. This matter is to be addressed during the final site plan approval process.
The roundabout relocation as suggested by Staff is not necessary and is acceptable as shown on the submitted plan as approved by the Conservation/Wetlands Commission.
The number of buildings shown on the Master Site Development Plan (MSDP) is acceptable. The number of buildings may not be increased without specific authorization and approval of the Zoning Commission. However it is acceptable to reduce the number of buildings or units within the buildings with notice to and review and approval by Staff.
Preliminary building design details as shown at this time are acceptable. However all final site and building designs shall be reviewed and recommended by the Design Board.
The Commission is aware of the fact that the submitted application does not provide for any “workforce housing” units. However as more residential units are constructed in Simsbury the Town’s ability to close the gap toward the State goal for affordable housing of 10% of is housing stock, this gap becomes harder to bridge. As a result the Commission agrees with the Planning Commission recommendation on housing and requires as part of this approval the provision of 10% of the units (18 units) be designated as affordable or workforce units. As part of this approval and as part of final site plan approval, the applicant is to work with Staff to designate these units and properly manage them in this status for 20 years. These units shall comply with the affordability requirements of the Simsbury Workforce Housing Overlay Zone.
As part of this approval the Commission requests the applicant to consider to the extent feasible, ways in which energy efficiency of this development can be optimized, whether through siting of buildings, possible use of photo-voltaics, the use of specific building materials which are energy efficient or are designed to be energy efficient.
The Commission notes with interest and appreciation the degree to which the applicant has portrayed the walkability of the development and the potential use of the nearby bike trail as part of this development. The aspects of the submitted plan and the final site plan execution shall attempt to optimize those aspects of the development in order to bring those features into being and use by the residents to the extent feasible. In addition, the Commission requires pedestrian sidewalks installed along RT. 10.
The Commission would like the applicant to clearly understand that it would like the Hopmeadow Street (RT 10) corridor in front of this property to remain as close as possible to the existing two (2) lane configuration. The applicant and his technical consultants should consult the 2011 Route 10 Corridor Study for specific information as to future plans for this area.
Also required as part of the approval of Application of #14-37 are the following six (6) findings:
The standards, requirements and required findings contained in this Article have been met.
The developer has provided, where appropriate, for the sustained maintenance of the development in general, and also for the open space or public amenities in accordance with Section Five above.
Utilities, drainage and recreational facilities have been physically laid out as not to unduly burden the capacity of such facilities, such other facilities presently connected therewith, and such facilities proposed by the adopted Town Plan of Conservation and Development.
The streets, roads, drives and blocks will be suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic and increased densities will not generate traffic in such amounts as to overload the existing or proposed street network in the area.
The capacity of the existing or proposed utility services are adequate for the proposed development.
The development will be in keeping with the purpose and intent of this Article as defined in Section One, the general public interest and the comprehensive plan.
The effective date of the regulation changes must be accepted by December 8, 2014.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Battos. Commissioners Gray, Battos, Pomeroy, Peterson and Ryan voted in favor of the application. Commissioner Cosgrove voted against the application. The application was approved.
2. Application #14-48 of John M. McCarthy, Agent; Chestnut Hill Associates of Simsbury, LLC, Owner; for a Site Plan Amendment for The Ensign House at Chestnut Hill, consisting of 35 living units, on the property located at 690 Hopmeadow St. (Assessor’s Map G11, Block 132, Lot 053). Zones SC-1 and SC-2.
Mr. Jackson Eno of 119 Westledge stated that his family along with the McCarthy brothers are owners of the Ensign House. He said that he has seen downtown Simsbury transform into a commercial street with many majestic homes removed to make room for commercial development. He is very sentimental of the Ensign House because 104 years ago, Mr. Eno’s father was born there and named after Ralph Ensign, builder/owner of the house. As a youth, he spent time in the house and his children were christened in the chapel on the property.
Mr. Eno said they have studied many options for the house. Since there is a lack of housing in the center of town, the team feels that providing residential housing with an elegant setting will be an asset.
Mr. Bill Crosskey of Crosskey Architects in Hartford described the plans for the Ensign House. The parish house built in the 1960s and the teller building from the former Webster Bank will be torn down. The mansion will be restored “to all its glory” and converted into seven apartments. Two new residential buildings will be added on the east and south sides consisting of 14 units in each. Total number of units for the site is 35 and all are rentals.
A one-story, 7-space garage for the seven units in the mansion will be built. Other additions include 15 garages for the east building, an 8-space carport and a 5-space carport on the south-east corner of the site.
The plan also includes keeping some of the existing trees and adding new trees. Also remaining is the brownstone wall on the south property line. An outdoor terrace will replace the raised patio area.
Mr. Peck answered Commissioner Pomeroy’s question regarding if there will be a public hearing for this application. Mr. Peck said that because the application meets the Town Center codes, a public hearing is not required.
Mr. Peck also explained that the application cannot be voted on this evening because the Town is waiting for confirmation from the Conservation Committee that this proposal meets the wetlands applications.
Commissioner Pomeroy stated that he appreciates the changes made to the design and working with the Zoning Commission and Design Review Board. This will be an exciting addition to downtown. Commissioner Peterson also agreed that this was a nice presentation.
3. Proposed 2015 Meeting Schedule
3. Commissioner Ryan moved to approve the Proposed 2015 meeting Schedule. Commissioner Gray seconded the motion and was unanimously approved.
VI. DISCUSSION OF NEW AND ONGOING PROJECTS:
Mr. Peck said that Berkshire Bank is in the process of working with DOT due to traffic issues at the intersection.
Mr. Peck received a call that Big Y needs a map for the closing.
Mr. Peck handed the Commissioners a report regarding the status of rental housing-- a draft was handed out at a prior meeting. The report discusses national, local and Hartford trends.
VII. ADJOURNMENT:
Commissioner Ryan made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:40 P.M. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Pomeroy and was unanimously approved.
Respectfully Submitted,
Irene Muench, Commissions Clerk