11/16/2020 Zoning Commission Minutes

SIMSBURY ZONING COMMISSION
TOWN OF SIMSBURY
REGULAR MEETING/WORKSHOP MINUTES - Subject to Vote of Approval
Monday, November 16, 2020 at 7:00 P.M. – Via Zoom
725 Hopmeadow Street, Simsbury, CT

PRESENT:Dave Ryan, Kevin Gray, Donna Beinstein, Bruce Elliott, Anne Erickson, Shannon Knall, Michael Doyle (arrived 7:02 pm)

ABSENT:Melissa Osborne, Diane Madigan

ALSO PRESENT:Michael Glidden, CFM CZEO, Director of Planning and Community Development; Laura Barkowski, Land Use Specialist

I.CALL TO ORDERChairman Ryan called the meeting to order at 7:00 
P.M.

II.ROLL CALL
Appointment of Alternates- Shannon Knall was appointed, until Michael Doyle arrived.

III.APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Approval of the Minutes of the September 21, 2020 meeting

The following corrections were noted:

Spelling corrections to both Bruce Elliott and Diane Madigan names throughout the entirety of the Minutes

Mr. Doyle made a motion to approve the Minutes of the September 21, 2020 as corrected. Motion seconded by Ms. Beinstein. Motion passed, 5-0-1 Mr. Gray abstained.

Approval of the Minutes of the October 5, 2020 meeting

The following corrections were noted:

Spelling corrections to both Bruce Elliott and Diane Madigan names throughout the entirety of the Minutes
Remove the highlighting

Mr. Gray made a motion to approve the Minutes of the October 5, 2020 as corrected. Motion seconded by Ms. Beinstein. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0
VI.GENERAL COMMISSION BUSINESS

Adoption of 2021 Meeting Schedule
Mr. Gray made a motion to adopt the 2021 meeting schedule as published. Seconded by Mr. Elliott. Motion passed unanimously 6-0.

Rules of Procedure Workshop
Mr. Glidden uploaded the corrected Rules of Procedure including the change on page 4 section 9 and it now reads “the Commission shall use Roberts Rules of Order as guidance for the procedural operation of meetings.” Mr. Ryan explained the change is to change it from mandatory to guidance. Mr. Elliott clarified the only other changes were making the Secretary position a Vice Chair and the removal of the consent agenda. Discussion ensued on the purpose and usefulness of consent agenda.

Mr. Elliott made a motion to adopt the Rules of Procedure as amended, Mr. Doyle seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously 6-0.

Regulations Update Workshop
Mr. Ryan indicated that Attorney Decrescenzo will be attending the next regular meeting to discuss the proposed regulations changes.

Mr. Ryan requested Mr. Glidden present what was discussed at the Affordable Housing Plan and how this will relate to zoning matters. Mr. Glidden gave an overview ofdraft Affordable Housing Plan from the Planning Commission to become compliant with 8-30j with focus on the possible ways to increase the number of affordable units within the town. Mr. Glidden discussed the proposed actions in the draft Affordable Housing Plan that the Zoning Commission would be the responsible party to enact the changes. One of the proposed actions is the investigation and implementation of inclusionary zoning pursuant to 8-2i of CGS whichallow for density bonuses provided the addition of affordable units. Mr. Glidden explained that current Zoning Regulations have two measures currently in place including the Workforce Housing Overlay Zone and the Housing Opportunity Zone.

Another proposed action directly relating to zoning is to consider two-family housing allowable by Special Permit in areas that are serviced by public water and sewers in areas that are currently zoned only for single family. These would be deed restricted units that would count for the required 10% housing stock.

Public input from this meeting included other proposals such as decreasing lot sizes to promote smaller house development within town, accessory dwelling units and increasing the permitted size.

Ms. Knall who was also in attendance of the Planning Commission’s public comment session reiterated that there was discussion concerning accessory dwelling units and that the current allowed size is too small. Ms. Knall noted an emphasis within the discussion of inclusionary meaning a downtown location where people have access to community experiences.

Ms. Beinstein asked for clarification on the definition on affordable housing and indicated that it seems high to her. Mr. Glidden clarified the statutory definition of affordable housing and how it is calculated and how it differs in the rental market.

Mr. Elliott inquired as to what is included into the cost of ownership. Mr. Glidden clarified maintenance and home upkeep is not included.

Mr. Elliott stated that there are very few communities in the State of Connecticut that met or are near the statutory required 10%.

Mr. Gray inquired as to the current housing stock at the level that is currently within the affordable price range and how to add it the affordable housing stock. Mr. Glidden explained mechanisms for loans that would qualify some of those homes as affordable. Mr. Gray discussed deed restriction and how it seems to be working against the goals of the statute. Mr. Gray indicated that this should addressed at the state legislature level to get away from the formula to make it less restrictive and more widely available. Ms. Knall voiced agreement.

Mr. Ryan inquired what the Zoning Commission can do to enhance affordable housing in town. Mr. Gray noted that the development has to be economically viable to builder as well. Ms. Beinstein noted this then becomes a density issue. Mr. Elliott discussed the cluster housing mechanism in the Zoning Regulations. Mr. Glidden clarified that the Cluster Zone, Open Space Zone and Village is still in the regulations. Mr. Elliott agreed that if you cannot make it attractive to builder it will not be built and that a balance needs to be reached. Mr. Gray inquired if we use a public trust land to minimize the building cost. Mr. Glidden explained that was also an idea discussed at the meetings to eliminate the land acquisition costs. Mr. Gray said that the Eno Farms development used that concept.

Mr. Elliott inquired how much of the town land is actually encumbered with some form of restriction or committed to open space.

Mr. Ryan inquired as to how the idea of mixing the affordable units with other units have fared. Mr. Glidden indicated Aspen Green was success.

Mr. Glidden inquired if the Commission would like him to reach out to developers to come speak about what can be done to encourage the development of affordable housing. The response was positive.

Additionally Mr. Glidden indicated that he has been in conversation with developers for a affordable housing development pending approval of the state.

Mr. Gray suggested the creation of an educational document to give the public more understanding about how the numbers are calculated and how with the current plan Simsbury would always be behind. Mr. Glidden clarified that 480 affordable units would have to be added and no market rate units added to meet the standards by the statute. Ms. Beinstein said that they have to look at different options or we will always be behind. Ms. Knall discussed the Toronto model of mixed used development.

Mr. Gray discussed how the accessory dwelling units were made more restrictive to appease the feel of the town at the time. Mr. Elliott clarified that they stopped requiring it to be family member according to the regulations and there was no public comment on decreasing the size allowed. Mr. Glidden clarified that shared utilities component that was changed.

Mr. Gray made a Motion to adjourn. Seconded by Mr. Gray. Unanimously approved 6-0.

Meeting Adjourned at 8:04 pm.

Submitted by:

Laura Barkowski
Acting Clerk