Planning Commission Minutes 09/27/2016

PLANNING COMMISSION

SEPTEMBER 27, 2016

REGULAR MEETING

I.             CALL TO ORDER

Chairman William Rice opened the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission at 7:04 p.m. in the Main Meeting Room at the Town Offices.  Also present were Jamie Rabbit, Director of Planning and Community Development; Michael Glidden, Assistant Town Planner; Janis Prifti, Commission Clerk; and other interested parties.

1.            Pledge of Allegiance

Chairman Rice led attendees in the Pledge of Allegiance.

II.            ROLL CALL

1.            Appointment of Alternates

Commission members in attendance were:  William Rice, Holly Beum, Alan Needham, Erin Leavitt-Smith, and Ron Locandro, Jr.

1.            Appointment of Alternates

Five regular members were present providing a quorum.

III.           APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the September 13, 2016 Regular Meeting

Chairman Rice made a motion to accept the September 13, 2016 Minutes, as recorded.

Commissioner Leavitt-Smith seconded the motion, and it was passed with Commissioners Beum, Needham, Rice, and Leavitt-Smith in favor, and Commissioner Locandro abstaining.

IV.          OLD BUSINESS

1.            Referrals

a.            CGS 8-3a Referral to the Zoning Commission on Zoning Application #16-39 of Robert M. Bourke, Esq., Petitioner, for Text Amendments to the Town of Simsbury Zoning Regulations to:  Article 7, Section B, to permit farm vineyards and wineries in all residential zones as permitted uses subject to site plan approval; such facilities would be allowed to hold special events/promotions and sell products at retail.  (continued from 09/13/2016)

b.            CGS 8-3a Referral to the Zoning Commission on Zoning Application #16-40 of Robert M. Bourque, Esq., Petitioner, for Text Amendments to the Town of Simsbury Zoning Regulations to:  Article 7, Section B, to permit large acreage agricultural farms in all residential zones as permitted uses subject to site plan approval; such farms would be allowed to hold special public and private events, sell products at retail, and operate commercial kitchens.  (continued from 09/13/2016)

Chairman Rice recalled that at the last meeting the Commissioners were requested to review the proposed text amendments, especially as they relate to the Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD).

Commissioner Needham asked on page 1, of Exhibit 2, what the meaning would be for: “Provided, however, that all existing Vineyards and Wineries existing and in full operation for at least one year prior to the adoption of this section shall be deemed in compliance of the exception for existing uses.” Mr. Rabbitt explained it deals with the ancillary uses that would be allowed on a farm.  Chairman Rice believed it would grandfather those uses.  The Commissioners discussed related concerns, including the location/measurement of decibels, parking, noise, refuse collection, dumpsters, and expansion of significant activity several times a week for a farm, and the sum of these effects on neighbors.  Commissioner Beum did not find guidance regarding these activities in the POCD; there have been significant expenditures in Town for easements in preserving land; and what defines a farm should be addressed going forward in the POCD, although the question will likely be addressed by Zoning.  Commissioner Needham noted that many farms would no longer exist if they did not have ancillary activities.  Chairman Rice noted with these text amendments, farming could become the ancillary activity.  

The Commissioners discussed the ramifications of selling wine or beer from the premises or for participants in events, e.g. wine/liquor stores.  Commissioner Locandro noted they must get a permit each time they hold an event.  Mr. Rabbitt added they can apply for a public gathering permit, but there are always questions regarding scale, number of events, and what they are allowed to do on a farm, and they are trying to clarify linked/secondary ancillary uses supporting farm activities.  Mr. Rabbitt continued an issue is scale with potential regulations that they not exceed 3 events per week, and 3 x 52=156 events/year, e.g. is it a wedding venue or farm winery that is part of a farm; such an event could not occur on a 100-acre estate property or in a tobacco or corn field.  Mr. Rabbitt noted the need to develop a hierarchy for utilizing existing facilities.

Mr. Rabbitt noted another issue is the permitting process and looking at the impacts of traffic, lighting, noise, etc.; are the permits cumulative, “as of right”, or “special exception permits” with potential for a weekend day holding an event in the morning and another in the afternoon, and repeated on the next day.  Mr. Rabbit noted the need for the text amendment to balance agriculture and ancillary uses in the context of the neighborhood, and whether that is consistent with the POCD - does it look more like a commercial zone than an agricultural zone?  Commissioner Locandro noted increased demand from people outside the Town to hold events on a local farm, although farms need to find more opportunity for revenue.  Commissioner Beum asked what the difference is in the text that they cannot already do under current permits?  Mr. Rabbitt indicated one of the requests is to put in a commercial kitchen, which is not allowed under current regulations.  Mr. Rabbitt noted the typical hierarchy is farm 1st, vineyard 2nd, and winery 3rd with associated bottling but no commercial kitchen, and bistro 4th in support of the farm.  Commissioner Beum noted farms are now hosting farm-to-table dinners and it must be costly to truck preparations in from offsite.  Chairman Rice noted the POCD discusses rural areas defined as “…active farmland and low-density residential” with suggested land use types including natural reserves, agriculture, and very low-density residential” but does not include commercial.  Chairman Rice believed that the proposed scale of the text amendments are not consistent with the POCD; Commissioner Needham noted the proposed increased density is more than currently exists on farms.  Commissioner Leavitt-Smith commented on the need for farms to do well and that they add to Town character, but was troubled by the scale and effect on neighbors of 4 events a week with increased traffic and whether that is consistent with the POCD. 

Mr. Rabbit explained that the Commission can decide whether the proposed text amendment is consistent with the POCD; and if it is determined to be inconsistent with the POCD, the Commission could structure an opinion suggesting modification of the scale listing why and suggesting accessory modifications in line with the primary land use which could allow the Commission to find in favor of a text amendment, e.g. modifying the permit structure – farm, crop, sales of the crop, associated production, scaling a commercial kitchen in support of existing acreage, how many supporting events a year scaled in size, and with conditions for operation.  Commissioner Locandro noted a large vineyard in Granby holds wine tastings for about 200 people, which may be the direction of the proposed text amendment.  Chairman Rice proposed that Staff draft a motion based on tonight’s conversation to be included in the packet for discussion at the next meeting.  Mr. Rabbitt planned to send a proposed draft motion regarding scale and the permitting process to the Commissioners a week in advance of the 10/25/2016 meeting and will work with the Chair on finding balance with the POCD. 

Chairman Rice clarified the request to Staff to draft language for both referrals for text amendments.

Regarding the location of the 10/25/2016 meeting, Mr. Rabbitt indicated the meeting would be held in the Town Hall Main Meeting Room which accommodates about 50 audience attendees.

V.            NEW BUSINESS

1.            Receipt of New Applications

a.            Application #16-04 of LADA, P.C. Land Planners, Agent; Adeline F. Wagner and Richard D. Wagner, Jr., Special Trustees, Owner; for a 7-lot re-subdivision on the property located at 152 Old Farms Road (Assessor’s Map C07, Block 303, Lot 010). Zone R-80. (to be received 09/27/2016; public hearing must be opened by 12/01/2016)

Chairman Rice read Application #16-04 into the record.

Terri-Ann Hahn, Principal of LADA, described the land as consisting of 3 pieces on 20+ acres owned by the Wagner family, with a single-family house on the property remaining and the land divided into 7 lots and a Town road.  Mr. Rabbitt recommended that, given the substantial Agenda for the 10/25/2016 meeting, the Commission schedule the Public Hearing for Application #16-04 for 11/22/2016, which is within the allowed 65 days.  Ms. Hahn agreed with that schedule. Chairman Rice noted the Public Hearing would be scheduled for 11/22/2016, although it is possible that the Public Hearings for the prior submitted applications from the 10/25/2016 meeting may be continued to the 11/22/2016 meeting.

2.            Kickoff meeting for workshop series regarding updating the Plan of Conservation and Development with Glenn Chalder, Planimetrics

Mr. Chalder provided the Commissioners with tabbed binders for booklets as they come in, and for the working sessions; he noted a “verb chart” in the beginning of the binder to assist with organizing material as it is developed.  Mr. Chalder proposed reviewing the initial memo provided to the Commissioners outlining the initial scope of work utilizing the existing POCD as an organizational framework in order to consider potential modifications/updates.  He requested the Commissioners tell him about any changes that jump out.  He will work with department heads regarding issues they see, members of other boards and commissions and changes they suggest, and any people the Commissioners believe have insight/vision regarding community issues. 

Mr. Chalder indicated the 1st part of the process would be intensive interviews now through November, with other interviews over a longer timeframe; and all interviews are anonymous.  The 2nd part of the process in December, January, and February would be breaking the plan process into 3 key parts – conservation, development, and infrastructure.  The 3rd part of the process would take until about March and include holding meetings inviting different commissions/boards to come in to obtain short testimony for developing a future strategy.  The 4th part of the process to about June of next year would be his preparation of a draft plan for review/revision with the goal of sharing that draft plan with the public in June.  Following the June review, the plan would be refined and a Public Hearing set with a 65-day wait period for adoption.  Mr. Chalder noted this schedule is laid out on pages 5, 6, and 7 with a week-by-week schedule on pages 6 and 7. 

Mr. Chalder indicated that, with the Commission’s authorization, he will begin the board and agency survey and notify the commissions/boards of the dates so they can begin to prepare what they will share for the plan.  Mr. Chalder requested a community scoping meeting be held prior to the 11/15/2016 scheduled meeting {note: the November regularly scheduled meeting will be on 11/22/2016} and the Commissioners agreed on the date of 11/03/2016; if the meeting must be earlier, it would be on 10/27/2016; and the time would be 7-9 p.m.  Mr. Chalder noted the benefit of distinctive lawn signs to advertise this scoping meeting – the 1st signs will be placed 4 weeks in advance saying, “Plan like your kids will live here”, and 2 weeks later, signs will be placed for, “The most fun you’ll every have at a public meeting”. The signs allowed for in the project budget generally cost about $500, falling under the line item for $5000 of reimbursable expenses, which includes printing the final plan. He indicated the signs would be placed in sensitive locations and removed the night of the meeting; the State DOT would be contacted where applicable to ensure legal placement, and at other appropriate locations throughout Town.  Mr. Rabbitt noted the signage cost is provided for in the $87,500 budget authorized by BOS; also, there are policies in place to provide for meeting notification in various publications, the Town webpage, SCTV, etc., as well as information on how to access the POCD.   The Commissioners agreed on posting the signs and noted a local vendor, Signs Plus in Granby, generally provides good turnaround; Town Staff will supplement with flyers/posters; and inserts potentially for church bulletins, senior center programs, etc.  The Commissioners discussed working with various church groups to get the word out. 

Mr. Chalder requested the Commissioners provide him this evening with feedback to his questions on page 8.  The first topic related to strengths/weaknesses of the plan and how to make it better.  Commissioner Needham liked the descriptors, which may need to be updated; however, he would like to be able to find things faster – searchable.  Chairman Rice added there is a need to search for ways to identify a section that needs to be referred to.  Commissioner Needham noted a potential need to set out the primary intent of the POCD, e.g. the POCD seeks to protect existing neighborhoods with some further explanation, e.g. to preserve historic locations or scenic views; he also felt a weakness of the POCD is not indicating what they are planning to do.  Mr. Chalder indicated there is an Executive Summary, which could also have a Letterman Top 10 list.  He discussed the use of colored dots to indicate priorities, with the highest occurring dots possibly indicating priorities and what is most meaningful, e.g. encouraging economic development in balance with preserving historic buildings and places.  Commissioner Leavitt-Smith felt the POCD could be shorter and had redundancies; it was not clear what items were done and responsible parties should probably be listed.  Mr. Chalder explained the current plan was worked on over a couple of years and people became wedded to certain positions they worked on resulting in a more lengthy plan; a more concise plan could be done this time regarding goals, vision, and strategy, with each chapter potentially 3-4 pages.  Mr. Rabbitt noted that traditional plans were 150-200 pages and are down to 75-125 pages with 20% photos/graphs.  Mr. Chalder recalled when CRCOG was redrawing the urban boundary and the Town refused to have the urban line drawn in Simsbury.  Commission Needham asked whether the Town Center should be the center of commercial activity, as opposed to neighboring towns, and noted the benefit of the form-based code.  Mr. Rabbitt and Mr. Chalder indicated the need for the Commission to really evaluate the form-based code in connection with the POCD and whether it is accomplishing community goals.  Commissioner Needham felt some paragraphs could be turned into a sentence for greater clarity; but the descriptors are helpful, e.g. lists of historic points/places, places to protect, etc.  Mr. Rabbitt added regarding urban design/architecture issues, there should be consideration of items touched upon in the last 10 years regarding patterns of development that are liked/disliked; while the Design Guidelines are good, certain development occurred and can a better community vision be developed.  Commissioner Needham felt the DRB Guidelines and Rte. 10 Corridor Study should be listed in the Plan.  Mr. Chalder noted after a plan is adopted, additional work is done; and there is funding in the budget to perform a telephone survey of 400 households. 

The Commissioners discussed character of the Town and predominance of local businesses.  Mr. Rabbitt expanded on the positive aspects of living in Simsbury with other towns striving to replicate its character, sense of place, beautiful colonial and older buildings, and the goal to maintain that character while building something new.  Mr. Chalder noted that the Town’s Design Guidelines were an award-winning publication, but should be looked at as part of this process.  Mr. Rabbitt commented standards should be in place to enhance and protect the community’s development.  Mr. Chalder indicated the Commission’s role to filter input received, determine strategic direction, and develop a more concise, searchable plan.

Chairman Rice indicated the landscape format was cumbersome.  Mr. Chalder responded that mapping technology is much better and the booklets will be portrait with a digital format available allowing users to zoom in on maps.  Regarding modernizing town buildings, Mr. Chalder responded that could help the Town get significant funding in the future.  He invited the Commissioners to email him with copies to Mr. Rabbitt; Mr. Rabbitt agreed as long as he receives a list.  Mr. Chalder provided the Commissioners with his email address g.chalder@planimetrics.net and asked for a response within the next week so he can get started.  He reconfirmed the next meeting will be 11/03/2016 and then on 11/14/2016.  Chairman Rice requested the Commissioners listen to Town residents and not exert undue pressure toward promoting their own positions.

VI.          ADJOURNMENT

Commissioner Needham made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:40 p.m.

Commissioner Leavitt-Smith seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.