Planning Commission Minutes 07/11/2017
Subject to Approval
Simsbury Planning Commission
TOWN OF SIMSBURY
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 7:00PM
Simsbury Town Offices – Main Meeting Room
933 Hopmeadow Street, Simsbury, Connecticut
PRESENT: Bill Rice, Holly Beum, Robert Kulakowski, Alan Needham, Erin Leavitt-Smith and Alternate Elizabeth Burt.
ABSENT: Ron Locandro, Alternate(s) Mark Drake and Gary Lungarini.
ALSO PRESENT: Director of Planning and Community Development Jamie Rabbitt and Assistant Town Planner Michael Glidden.
I. CALL TO ORDER:
1. Pledge of Allegiance.
Chairman Bill Rice called the meeting to order at 7:03PM.
II. ROLL CALL:
1. Appointment of Alternates.
Dr. Burt was seated for Mr. Locandro.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – JUNE 13, 2017 REGULAR MEETING:
The June 13, 2017 Minutes should be amended as follows:
Second page, seventh paragraph, line 96, the portion of text that reads, “…Mike Goman of 45 Old Stone Crossing…” should instead read, “…Tom Frank of 19 Banbury Drive…”; and
Second page, seventh paragraph, lines 99 and 104, the name “Goman” should instead read “Frank”.
MOTION: Mr. Rice, Ms. Leavitt-Smith second, to approve the June 13, 2017 Minutes as amended; unanimously approved.
IV. OLD BUSINESS:
1. Public Hearings.
None.
2. Applications.
None.
V. NEW BUSINESS:
1. Receipt of New Applications.
None.
2. Referrals.
a. CGS 8-3a Referral to the Zoning Commission on Zoning Commission Application #17-35 of Chip Knierim, Agent, for proposed Text Amendments to Article 5, Section B.1.c., (Temporary Uses) of the Town of Simsbury Zoning Regulations: Temporary camping, including both tent and recreational vehicles, may be permitted for no more than 3 consecutive nights on Town of Simsbury Owned property. Provided that the organization is granted permission by the Board of Selectmen and applies for a public gathering permit from the Town of Simsbury; and Article Six, Section C, of the Town of Simsbury Zoning Regulations to add the following language after Trailer camps: Unless expressly permitted elsewhere in these regulations on a temporary basis.
Chip Knierim appeared before the Commission regarding this application. Noting that he is on the Board of Directors for the Performing Arts Center (PAC), he explained that the PAC is a non-profit group that leases the Iron Horse Boulevard parcel to host concerts and manage the facility. Mr. Knierim noted that for the last couple of years, casual camping has been occurring on the site that the PAC had thought was permissible but has since learned otherwise. He explained that the PAC this year had plans to formalize the camping as a promoter for an upcoming jazz festival in August had marketed camping as part of the three-day concert weekend. Mr. Knierim noted that the promoter has made extensive plans for the camping aspect, in terms of provisions planned for waste removal, rules, and security. Mr. Knierim indicated that the camping component was presented to the Town at the time that a public gathering permit was granted for the event.
Mr. Needham questioned whether the camping component was indeed discussed at the time that the public gathering permit was sought. Mr. Knierim could not confirm this to be the case as he noted that he was not present for that process. Mr. Needham questioned whether fires would be included should camping be allowed. Mr. Knierim confirmed that the promoter has included an allowance for it in their marketing but the ultimate approval would be up to the Town. He explained that the camping is proposed for the PAC’s Lots C and D, which are located behind a row of foliage when viewing the spot from the field.
Mr. Knierim opined that the language proposed for the text amendment is more stringent than what has been historically occurring with camping on Town-owned land in Simsbury, citing the long historical practice of the local Boy Scouts. He noted that the Zoning Regulations have never expressly prohibited camping.
Mr. Rice questioned whether Mr. Knierim could point to a section within the current Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD) that would lend support to the merits of this application. Mr. Knierim indicated that he had not researched any specific sections but believed that this enhances recreation and favorable uses of a town facility, noting that the PAC is good for the Town and would be consistent with the overall intent of the POCD.
Mr. Rice opened the floor for public comment.
Joan Coe of 26 Whitcomb Drive spoke in opposition of the application, opining that the PAC has provided misinformation during the public gathering permitting process in terms of the proposed camping activities at this site. Ms. Coe was opposed to the unintended effects of the likely influx of people as a result from a three-day concert.
Laura Nigro of 4 Kilbourn Farms Lane opined that consideration of camping for the concert and camping by Boy Scouts are two very different concepts, explaining that the scouts pride themselves on “leaving no trace behind”.
Referring to the POCD, Dr. Burt noted that one of the goals include protecting water resources. She noted her concerns with trash being thrown into the river or left on the river’s edge. Additionally, Dr. Burt noted that preserving open space and scenic views are also cited in the POCD, which could be negatively impacted by allowing the camping. She noted that campers are often tempted to chop branches off trees in attempts to feed campfires and that this would present a threat as a detriment to natural resources. Mr. Needham noted that on page 46 of the POCD, the Iron Horse meadows are listed as an aesthetic character location worthy of protection. He noted that page 48 guides the Commission to “…continue to identify and protect the resources, sense of place, and quality of life that contribute to the overall character of Simsbury…”, opining that this is a detrimental use to what one would consider a character place. Mr. Rice shared his perception that the Zoning Regulations are perhaps somewhat loose on the proposed use and that the text amendment may serve to provide the Town with more regulatory power in this regard.
Referring again to the POCD, the Commission also reviewed and considered whether an argument could be made that there are economic benefits which could be derived from this text amendment. Mr. Kulakowski agreed that there could. Ms. Beum concurred. Ms. Leavitt-Smith noted that she was conflicted with this application, agreeing that the language does not automatically permit the use but instead allows the Zoning Commission to review applications. She noted her objection with campers at this Iron Horse Boulevard site as part of a concert application burning fires.
MOTION: Mr. Kulakowski, Ms. Beum second, to provide a positive referral to the Zoning Commission regarding Application #17-35 of Chip Knierim, Agent, for proposed Text Amendments to Article 5, Section B.1.c., noting that it does meet the economic criteria cited in the POCD; Motion failed with Mr. Kulakowski and Ms. Beum voting aye while Mr. Rice, Mr. Needham, Ms. Leavitt-Smith and Dr. Burt were opposed.
b. Referral letter from First Selectwoman regarding Deepwater Wind application to Connecticut Siting Council for a 26.4 MW solar installation.
Mr. Rice reminded the Commission that the Board of Selectmen is seeking input from town boards and commissions regarding this Petition for Declaratory Ruling submitted to the Connecticut Siting Council. He noted that unlike other applications this Commission has reviewed, this twenty six megawatt solar installation is not regulated or reviewed at the local level. Mr. Rice sought opinions regarding how this proposal fits with Simsbury’s POCD. Mr. Glidden emphasized the advisory character of this Commission’s consideration of the 1200 page petition.
The Commission discussed and reviewed how the elements of Deepwater Wind’s petition compliment portions of the POCD and how it does not. It was agreed that Mr. Rice, in collaboration with Mr. Glidden, will draft a correspondence articulating these points discussed at this meeting.
One area where the project serves the POCD is in terms of the simple fact of opening any business falls under “enhanced economic activity” on page 8 as well as “net economic impact” on page 105. The fact that there could be much more objectionable uses at this site instead of the current proposal was also perceived by the Commission as a positive. Noting that the land is not designated as Open Space, Mr. Needham referred commissioners to the Agricultural Resources section, specifically to a goal included on page 29, “…support farms and preserve farmland to help retain the rural characteristics of the community…”.
Noting an area where the proposal contradicts the goals of the POCD, Mr. Needham opined that the location is a “character site” as included in the “List of Character Places - Simsbury’s Treasures” on page 46. He noted the goal identified on page 48 of the POCD, “…Continue to maintain and enhance the established character of Simsbury…”.
Page 22 of the POCD, guiding the protection of natural resources in town, include provisions on environmental studies. Mr. Glidden noted that a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment has been completed but that he has not had the opportunity to review it yet. Mr. Needham suggested that perhaps a recommendation can be made to await staff’s review of the study and recommendation whether additional studies are warranted. Also relating to natural resource protection, Mr. Needham noted that Objective L on page 19 of the POCD includes language to “…require developments to use habitat-friendly design elements…”.
Referring to the Transportation section of the POCD, the Commission noted that a key point that should be emphasized is how the proposal will likely conflict with the idea to reduce traffic by creating a roadway running from Hopmeadow Street, near Wescott Road, running diagonally southwest towards Hoskins and County Road, in an effort to alleviate traffic on Hopmeadow. A map on page 135 of the POCD addresses this with language on page 86 of the POCD including, “…An additional priority for any development of the north end should include a right-of-way for an arterial connection between the intersection of Wolcott Road and Route 10/Hopmeadow Street through to the intersection of Hoskins Road and County Road. This arterial will divert traffic wishing to go north on Route 10/Hopmeadow Street and/or Wolcott Road away from the Hoskins Road/Ely Lane and Route 10/Hopmeadow Street intersection. This proposal is also consistent with the recommendation to shift State Route 315 to Wolcott Road…”
Mr. Needham pointed to the section describing the section on “Sense of Place” in the POCD as well as specifically calling out Policy 4 carried on page 113, “…Encourage economic development to harmonize with the natural surroundings, adjoining uses, and any surrounding residential areas…”.
Included in the positive aspects of the proposal, Ms. Beum, referenced the applicant’s stated intention to preserve tobacco barns which fit Policy 2 on page 35, “…Ensure the protection of historic resources…”. Mr. Rice and Mr. Kulakowski agreed.
The recent adoption of legislation making the development of agricultural land more difficult was also noted.
Mr. Rice noted that there are no mentions in the POCD about generating power.
With regards to the letter to be drafted, the consensus of commissioners was to not take a position in favor or in opposition to the application but instead lay out the consistencies and inconsistencies found with the POCD. Ms. Leavitt-Smith disagreed, and preferred that the Commission take a position either for or against the application.
Mr. Rice suggested including language that, “…the consensus of the Planning Commission was that the petition is generally not consistent with the POCD but does has elements of consistency...”. A draft of the letter will be forwarded to the full commission.
MOTION: Mr. Kulakowski, Ms. Leavitt-Smith second, that the Chairman work with town staff on drafting the response to the Board of Selectmen’s request, which will reflect the areas of consistency and inconsistency with the POCD and shall also include language reflecting the consensus of opinion that it is generally not compatible; unanimously approved.
VI. WORKSHOP:
1. POCD – Discussion on Draft (Glenn Chalder).
Glenn Chalder appeared before the Commission to discuss and review the comments received at the June 13, 2017 workshop. He provided a tabulation of comments received at that meeting along with some that came in afterwards. Mr. Chalder indicated that based on those, he provided recommendations for modifications to the POCD where he thought appropriate. The Commission reviewed these comments and suggestions and provided feedback to Mr. Chalder in this regard.
It was noted that this draft will be forwarded to the Board of Selectmen and the CROG (Capitol Region Council of Governments). Additionally, it was noted that the proposed 2017 draft of the POCD, as amended at this meeting, will be uploaded to the town’s website.
MOTION: Mr. Rice, Mr. Kulakowski second, to send the May, 2017 Draft of the POCD, as amended on July 11, 2017, to Public Hearing on September 7, 2017 at 7:00PM, to be held at Eno Memorial Hall or Library Program Room; unanimously approved.
VII. ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION: Ms. Beum, Ms. Leavitt Smith second, to adjourn at 9:52PM; unanimously approved.
Respectfully submitted,
Pamela A. Colombie
Recording Clerk