|
ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 6, 2006
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Thursday, April 6, 2006 in the Town Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman Anthony DiPace called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Anthony DiPace, Chairman
Elizabeth Ballard
Jeffrey Cooper
Charles Duren
Jason Jones
Kathleen Sarno, Alternate
Charles Ladd, Alternate
Nicles Lefakis, Alternate (arrived at 8:00 p.m.)
ALSO PRESENT: Jose Giner, Director of Planning
MINUTES
Commissioner Jones made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ballard, to approve the Minutes of March 9, 2006. The Minutes were approved by a 5 – 0 – 2 vote. Commissioners Sarno and Ladd abstained.
Commissioner Jones made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ballard, to approve the Minutes of March 16, 2006. Commissioner Ladd made a correction on page 15, paragraph six. The change is “much” should be changed to “any”. The Minutes, as amended, were approved by a 6 – 0 – 1 vote. Commissioner Sarno abstained.
STAFF COMMENTS
a. Town Attorney (in person)
Mr. Giner reported the Town Attorney’s Office has no pending cases. The only remaining pending cases are being handled by outside counsel.
b. Zoning Enforcement Officer (in person)
Zoning Enforcement Officer Wayne Bickley responded to Commission questions. Commissioner Sarno asked about the home occupation listed as preparing houses for sale. Mr. Bickley stated this is a business where representatives visit a home to make sure it is presentable for sale.
c. Director of Planning
Mr. Giner stated the Commission has received tonight the Model Aquifer Protection Regulations that the state put out last summer. They are annotated and include the statutory references. Also presented to the Commission was the draft of Enfield’s regulations taken from the state’s model regulations with some minor changes. Mr. Giner presented a copy of the first draft to the state and they have already suggested additional minor changes. Mr. Giner stated the town needs to adopt these aquifer protection regulations as soon as possible. Level A mapping has been done for two areas of the town which obligates the town to add those level A areas to the zoning map. Regarding the changes to the mapping, the state does not require a public hearing or vote of the Commission. The procedure is to add this information to the mapping and publish a notice in the paper showing the revised map.
Commissioner DiPace asked if the town is already following the regulations. Mr. Giner stated that is not the case because the proposed regulations are very detailed. The law requires that anyone that proposes anything within the aquifer designated areas to notify the water companies for comment. It also requires registration of existing businesses.
Chairman DiPace requested that Commission members review the draft of the proposed Aquifer Protection Regulations with discussion regarding the timing of the adoption of these regulations to be scheduled for the Commission’s next meeting. Chairman DiPace further requested that staff draft a letter to the town’s business owners informing them of this upcoming State of Connecticut DEP requirement which will require registration and a fee.
Mr. Giner stated there is a proposed fee schedule for the Town of Enfield and the Commission can discuss that further at their next meeting. Mr. Giner sent a copy to Ray Warren with a suggestion that at some point he might want to invite the state in to respond to questions from property owners.
Mr. Giner stated Stonington has regulations and Mansfield is about ready to adopt such regulations. He could not comment on the scope of the additional workload to staff until the program begins. Chairman DiPace requested that Mr. Giner contact the Town of Stonington to see if they have experienced any problems with the implementation of these new aquifer regulations.
Mr. Giner stated once the Commission adopts the town’s aquifer protection regulations, they do not become official until the Commissioner approves them. He has sixty days from the time the regulations are received to respond. The regulations would have to go to a hearing and be noticed while the map only has to be published.
Chairman DiPace reiterated that Commission members should review the proposed aquifer protection regulations and email any comments or questions to Mr. Giner. They will be an agenda item for the next meeting under Applications to be Accepted. If Commission members are comfortable with their content, the Commission can then schedule a public hearing.
Mr. Giner reported Saturn/Balise is changing their Saturn dealership to Auto Credit Used Cars. They requested doing some minor changes to their facade with the color being changed to blue. The work has already been started. Mr. Giner was instructed by the Commission that if they were doing only the building trim, it could be approved administratively. Anything beyond that would require the applicant to come back to the Commission for an amendment to their plans.
Mr. Giner reported he received a letter from someone who wanted to have a short discussion with the Commission regarding boulevards. Chairman DiPace and Commissioner Duren suggested this subject be provided to the Fire Department for their comments prior to further Commission review. Mr. Giner will schedule this item on the Commission’s next agenda.
Mr. Giner brought up the Stop & Shop renovations. He presented the plans that the Commission approved but noted the file copy is missing a plan sheet. The sheet was included in the plans approved by the Wetlands Commission. The sheet is page 21.01 – Grading and Drainage. This sheet did not get signed because it was not included. Mr. Giner now has the mylars and the request before the Commission is to approve signing this sheet. Mr. Giner reiterated that the plan sheet was shown on the index but never was included. The applicant’s engineer said it was there for the Commission members. Mr. Giner stated following a Commission meeting, the procedure is to keep only the file copy of the plans and the sheet in question was not included. Commissioner Duren did not feel comfortable signing the plan. Chairman DiPace requested that this item be discussed later in the agenda under Other Business.
d. Town Manager – 8-24 – CIP Budget
Geoffrey McAlmond, Deputy Director of Public Works, presented the Capital Improvement Program being proposed for 2006-07. The town is proposing to fund a $4 million capital improvement program which is in line with past years. The funding includes seventeen projects and the Commission has received the sheets for their review. Mr. McAlmond added that Sheet 168 was submitted in error and there is no funding requested for this fiscal year for that item. Chairman DiPace noted receipt of a letter from a town resident which included a request for sidewalks in the area of Grassmere Country Club. Mr. McAlmond requested a copy of this letter so that he can follow up on it.
Following a review of the individual sheets by the Commission, Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Jones, that the Commission recommend approval to the Town Council of the 8-24 CIP Budget as submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternates Sarno and Ladd voting.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Margaret Jedziniak, Abbe Road, pointed out the corner of Hazard Avenue and Middle Road which contains many large signs that are very distracting to motorists. Another location containing a patch of trees in need of trim is coming out of the Senior Center on Elm Street. Ms. Jedziniak noted it is hard to see the cars coming around the corner because of the size of the trees. Commissioner Duren suggested the Traffic Safety Officer post a sign regarding the upcoming entrance. Chairman DiPace requested that the Traffic Safety Officer take a look at this sight line to see if it meets the requirements.
CORRESPONDENCE
Chairman DiPace reported receipt of a newsletter from the Northern Connecticut Land Trust, an update from the Capitol Region Council of Governments, and a copy of a cease and desist order from Mr. Bickley to Lia Volkswagen. Regarding the last item, Mr. Giner reported Mr. Bickley has also cited the Lia establishment on Enfield Street for similar violations.
Chairman DiPace reported receipt of the Inland Wetlands and Water Courses Notice of Action dated March 6 and March 22, 2006 as well as the Notice of Action from the Enfield Zoning Board of Appeals dated March 27, 2006.
Chairman DiPace reported receipt of a letter from TGI Friday’s regarding painting their roof. Chairman DiPace stated one of the conditions of approval was the color was going to be changed. If they cannot paint it the approved color, he suggested that perhaps they need to install a different roof in order to comply with the Commission’s approval. Commissioner Duren asked if the unfinished plywood used on the tower was approved. It was his understanding that whole area was to be painted beige. Chairman DiPace requested that the Commission receive a copy of the TGI Friday’s original approval with the colors for the Commission’s next meeting.
Chairman DiPace reported receipt of a letter from Jose Giner to Attorney Carl Landolina regarding the Pappas application. Also received was a letter from the State DEP regarding the Department of Forestry. Chairman DiPace suggested that the Commission, over the summer, attempt to correct some of these statistics and make the town safer. Mr. Giner stated he will send a copy of this information to the Fire Marshals and ask them to respond with any concerns.
Chairman DiPace reported receipt of information from the American Planning Association and information on an integrated parcel management solution seminar.
Commissioner Duren reported receipt of a copy of the letter sent to the Chairman from Senator John Kissell dated March 21, 2006, addressed to Governor Rell regarding transportation issues and, specifically, the new proposed train station in Enfield.
Commissioner Duren reported receipt of a letter dated April 3, 2006, received April 5, 2006, from Edward J. Turner regarding Pheasant Hill (sheds and the buffer) and requesting that Commission members visit the site. Commissioner Jones requested that the Commission accommodate Mr. Turner’s request. Chairman DiPace stated over the next couple of weeks, Commission members will try to meet with Mr. Turner and will contact him directly regarding appropriate individual times.
Commissioner Duren reported receipt of a letter dated March 31, 2006 from Jill Krawiec, 124 Town Farm Road requesting that the Town install sidewalks beginning at 124 Town Farm Road and extending to Abbe Road and south on Abbe Road to meet existing sidewalks that end on Abbe. Chairman DiPace requested that Mr. Giner send a copy of this letter to the Public Works Department.
PUBLIC HEARINGS – Continued from March 9, 2006 Meeting
a. PH#2541 – Zone Change for 25+ acre parcel on east side of Powder Hill Road from R-88 to R-44 District, Powder Hill Road and Long Hollow Road, zoned R-88, Map 84, Lot 15 and 16, Powder Hill Sand & Gravel, LLC, Applicant/Owner. (Must close by April 6).
Dana Steele, Jay Ursery, and Mark and Ed Spazzarini appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Mr. Steele stated this application is a continuation from the Commission’s meeting two meetings ago. The request is for a zone change from R-88 to R-44 for property located on Powder Hill Road. One issue discussed at that meeting included the aquifer. There are two water companies that have wells that are within the consideration area. They have now received letters from both the Hazardville Water Company and the Connecticut Water Company indicating that they have no objections to this proposed zone change.
Mr. Steele stated there were some questions about the location of specific wells and their depth. Mr. Giner contacted the water company and received some information related to those questions. Mr. Steele stated looking at the map, the Connecticut Water Company wells are approximately 1,000’ to the northwest of the corner of the property. The water company indicated those wells are 100’ to 130’ deep. It appears the existing grade in that area is around elevation 80. Their site is at an elevation of 140 at one end and down at the entrance is approximately elevation 110. They are, therefore, a good distance both horizontally and vertically above those wells.
Mr. Steele stated the Hazardville Water Company wells are even further away or almost a mile away and located to the west on the opposite side of the Scantic River.
Mr. Steele recapped some of the points made at the last hearing. This project is proposing to provide public water coming from Abbe Road down Powder Hill Road which will provide a public water service for other residents if they want it along Powder Hill Road. It will also provide the availability of fire hydrants which will improve fire protection in the area and be a benefit to the area.
Mr. Steele stated they submitted with this application a concept plan of what could be proposed under the R-44 zone. He presented plans for a single-family subdivision with a cul de sac extending through the property and fourteen lots as well as a storm water management area. In contrast to an R-88 subdivision, Mr. Steele presented a plan showing the same area with the same length road and ten lots rather than fourteen. The result of this zone change would be the potential of four additional building lots. The twenty-five acre parcel under R-88 would allow twelve lots maximum density. This would be fourteen lots and in terms of density, it would not be that much of an increase. In terms of compatibility with the neighborhood, the lot sizes are more compatible to R-44. In addition, five out of the fourteen lots could meet the R-88 zone due to the configuration of the site and the topography.
Mr. Steele stated the Plan of Development does talk about properties that are southeast of the Scantic River indicating they should be maintained as a low density. The plan they put together for R-44 is consistent with the area. In addition, with the very limited amount of increased density that can be achieved, the proposal would be consistent with the Plan proposal to keep the density low.
Mr. Steele stated there were questions raised regarding the soils in the area and whether or not there were terrace escarpment slopes. The soil survey done in the 1960’s did show that this area had terrace escarpment slopes; however, this site is a gravel pit and sand and gravel have been removed from the site over time so that now there are no more terrace escarpment soils left. There are steep slopes but those are not terrace escarpment soils but exposed sub soils. They can be stabilized and do not present the development challenges that some of the surrounding properties may share because they still have existing terrace escarpment slopes. Mr. Steele presented a letter from the soil scientist that looked at the property to confirm what he just explained. Mr. Giner requested a copy of this letter for the file.
Commissioner Cooper stated it seems like the only reason they are requesting a zone change is so that they can construct more houses. Mr. Steele confirmed it would be an increase from ten homes to fourteen.
Commissioner Cooper noted this property is completely surrounded by R-88 on all four sides. Mr. Steele stated it is in a low spot and completely surrounded by high slopes. If you compare the R-88 subdivision to the R-44 concept presented, the result is the spacing of the lots and the configuration is not crammed in and is consistent with a typical subdivision. In an R-88 subdivision, you would have 175’ of frontage and the only difference between R-88 and R-44 would be the depth of the lots. In this case, because of the restriction on width, in order to get the area, they have to be spread out more. This creates greater separations and rather than 100’ between homes, there would be 200’. Mr. Steele felt this is more than what you would expect in an R-88. He felt the R-44, while it does include four additional houses, it also provides a more proportional layout.
Commissioner Ballard noted the letter from the Connecticut Water Company dated February 23 which states they are concerned with any land use activities on this site and they recommend the zone change application be denied to protect the water quality and quantity of the aquifer recharge area. Commissioner Ballard stated the proposal now is to add more houses and the next letter from the water company dated March 1 states it is okay to proceed and they have added four homes. She requested an explanation.
Mr. Steele stated he called the water company and asked if there was a concern about the four additional houses. They said four additional homes is not going to make a difference. Mr. Steele also provided the water company with additional information and they revised their original letter.
Commissioner Duren asked about the advantages to the town to change this zone. Jay Ursery of J. R. Russo responded to Commissioner Ballard’s question about the water company. When the notification goes to the water company, it is a letter format stating they are applying for a zone change and it does not include much more specific information. They responded and that was the first letter the Commission received. Based upon that response, Mr. Steele called them and spoke to Cindy Fasendero about this specific zone change and what they were doing. Once he explained the project to her, she understood and issued the second letter stating that the difference between ten lots and fourteen lots would have no effect on their wells.
Mr. Steele stated in response to Commissioner Ballard’s question, the applicant has to justify the expense of bringing water service from Abbe Road through this property, something that will be a benefit to the town.
Commissioner Duren stated the increase in lots would also increase the population to the schools, it would increase rubbish collection and other services, and it increases the transportation by increasing the number of vehicles on the street. Mr. Steele stated the project would also increase property taxes and revenue to the town.
Commissioner Duren stated his major concern is by changing the zone and adding four more homes, there would be the addition of four more septic systems. Mr. Steele stated the septic system is designed by an engineer and it is reviewed by the Health Department and the water company. There is no problem with a septic system being constructed in an aquifer area. Further discussion on septic systems and possible problems followed. Commissioner Duren saw a need to protect the town’s water.
Commissioner Ballard asked where is the road in comparison to the existing road that goes up to the sand and gravel pit. Mr. Steele pointed it out on the map and noted the proposed road is a little further up the hill. They tried to locate it so that it is right in the bend so that there is the best sight line in both directions. Mr. Steele acknowledged that would be handled during any site plan review and the proposed plan is just a concept plan.
Mr. Ursery stated the reason for this zone change is to allow the applicants to develop the property in a single-family residential manner. They are requesting an additional four lots only and with the same 1,200’ of road whether it is R-44 or R-88. Mr. Ursery noted the applicants have lived in town all their lives, they have a business in town, and they have a very good track record. They are before the Commission trying to do something that is going to be a benefit to the town.
Mr. Ursery stated there are no sewers in this area. Any future development that is done here is going to be on a septic system. The Commission has two letters from two water companies who are both telling the town that they are not concerned about this zone change. Anything that is built here is going to be designed by a professional engineer, its going to be sealed by a professional engineer and it is going to be in accordance with the State of Connecticut and reviewed and approved by the North Central Health District. Mr. Ursery stated they do hundreds of these every year and they have never had one fail in the last thirty years. The soils in this area are excellent and very conducive to septic systems. There is no problem on this site with septic systems whether it is ten, fourteen, or thirty. Further discussion led by Commissioner Duren on possible septic tank failures followed.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the audience.
Mrs. L. L. Collins, Hazardville Section, remembered when Cooper Street was Cooper Shop. The flood took the bridge down in 1955 and all the businesses burned down. The state then came in and purchased 108 acres of property. Mrs. Collins stated her property is not too far from this proposed development. She questioned the septic tanks proposed and the possibility of them leaking. She noted it took years to purify the river and the area is wonderful. She feeds eighteen deer and had a concern about them taking over the deer’s property.
Cheryl Ranny, 17 Powder Hill Road, spoke about changing the zone from R-88 to R-44. If one looks at where the existing homes are now up towards Abbe Road in the vicinity of her home, the existing area was zoned R-88 after the building of those homes. Her lot is approximately 1.3 acres and that was changed to an R-88 after her home was built. This land is a nonconforming use and is presently being used as a sand pit. Changing it to R-44 also changes the entire area around there going up towards Long Hollow. Right now that road is a rural road with only a few households located on it with no town services. All residents have septic systems and use well water. There are no sidewalks. If there was a zoning change and more density in the housing, the town would have to bring the road up to code. This would mean sidewalks, water and sewer. Ms. Ranny addressed the damage caused by the flooding last year which made the road impassable from both areas. If more homes are located down in this area, Ms. Ranny is concerned about the soil erosion. She also feels there is an appropriate use going on right now on this land without it having to be rezoned.
Jack Sheridan, Buchanan Road, spoke against the zone change. He has concerns about the aquifer and the septic systems. He added if there are young families with children that occupy these homes, they are going to want sidewalks. He brought up the history of Abbe Road where a lot of the homes had sidewalks and they have since torn them up. Mr. Sheridan noted the Commission discussed at the last hearing session a geological report about this area and how much drainage would go into the aquifers. He did not hear anything about that. Another concern is the street surface drains and the nitrates and pesticides from the homes. Mr. Sheridan urged the Commission to leave the zoning as it is.
Mike Dynia, Chairman of the Enfield Conservation Commission and Scantic River Watershed Association, stated both of these organizations are against the zone change. The main reason is it goes against the Town of Enfield Plan of Conservation and Development which was last revised in 1999. Also, there is a lack of town sewers and town water in this area, there are steep slopes which will cause erosion, there is an aquifer in the area and this would set a precedent in this area for others to ask for a zone change to R-44. Mr. Dynia read excerpts from the Town of Enfield Plan of Conservation and Development and stated the area proposed to be rezoned is across from the Scantic River and also part of the watershed area.
Madeline George, Brainard Road, spoke as a member of the Enfield Conservation Commission. Conservation deals with the preservation of natural elements – drinking water from the aquifers, soil stabilization, tree cover for free air, open space for passive and active recreation, preservation and encouragement of food production, and surface water quality. Conservation efforts also consider the costs of providing for these things or the cost of remedial work or finding alternate supplies and sources. Ms. George noted no zone change can be granted with a contingency or implied agreement that any site plan presented to illustrate the application is a determinant for the Commission’s decision. This is a request to allow a greater density on a particular parcel than its present zone. Site conditions will obviously determine final development plans and any subdivision in a recently active gravel pit has obvious location and soil problems. Ms. George stated when she worked as a professional site planner, she often developed several plans for a site – one that the community might like or another one or more for maximum use of the site and, finally, a plan that would eventually be approved by the appropriate review commissions. Very often the person making the zone change request did not become the ultimate developer of the site.
Ms. George stated the issue is purely a question of allowing increased residential density over the Hazardville aquifer on the Scantic River flood plain and in an area of high probability for erosion. It is not a question of parity with abutting properties. This property has given up its non-replaceable assets in return for profits for several years with the town’s permission. Ms. George directed the Commission’s attention to the 1999 Plan of Conservation and Development which grew from plans in 1965, updated in l979 and l987. Plans such as this and zoning were adopted in New England communities not in response to save the land or preserve history but as a result of cost benefit analysis for the community to be able to control its expenses and plan its infrastructure improvements. It set out a vision of the community which its present and future population could afford. Ms. George stated the present Plan of Conservation and Development consistently repeats several of these same themes, statements and goals of the previous plans. These statements are still based upon cost benefit analysis. On page one of the Executive Summary of the Plan, the last paragraph states “the general land use plan is to limit the Town Farms area southeast of the arc of the Scantic River to the lowest density development, open space preservation and farmland.” The goals of the Plan speak to providing for a wide range of housing types to enable people of all income levels and housing needs to live in Enfield. Ms. George read additional excerpts from the Plan of Development.
Ms. George stated the town is presently reconstructing their road infrastructure. Increased density of one parcel and then another places additional costs on the town that was not envisioned in the long range planning. The extension of water, sewers, the capacity of the water treatment plant, street lighting, public schools, fire and safety services and ultimately total reconstruction of the public road service in this area has to be considered. Ms. George discussed septic systems and the irrigation of lawns in unstable soils which could affect the Hazardville aquifer. There is also the possibility of the underground storage of propane tanks for residential use and these lots would allow for that.
Ms. George stated at some point in time, someone is going to hold the town responsible for the quality and quantity of water in the aquifers which supply Enfield’s population. Larger lots with lower density coverage and lower usage are at least a better response to quantity and quality issues. Ms. George stated there appears no overriding reason to change the zone on this parcel.
William Ranny, 17 Powder Hill Road, questioned how people are running a business out of a residentially zoned area. Chairman DiPace stated they have a special use permit for the business and it was approved by the town. Mr. Ranny stated the pumping station for the Connecticut Water Company is about 300’ from the entrance. He discussed the road in the area which he considers one of the most dangerous roads in Enfield in the winter. Mr. Ranny stated if the zone is changed to R-44, the increase to fourteen houses will mean about 30,000 square feet of lawn per house. Each pesticide program means about 240 pounds per year per house which equals 3,360 pounds of fertilizer and pesticides. Mr. Ranny stated he understood that they were digging and were told not to dig any deeper because they might contaminate the aquifer. They had to start going outward. Mr. Ranny stated the change may not be visible environmentally for fifteen years but he noted how long it took for Fermi. He hopes that if something does happen here, that a professional that knows about aquifers and the drainage system is hired.
Kathleen Vose, 16 Powder Hill Road, stated she is opposed to changing the zone from R-88 to R-44. If this area is allowed to change, she feels other property owners would be able to apply for the same zone change and it would be difficult to refuse them. Ms. Vose asked Mr. Giner if he has had any conversation with the State Department of Environmental Protection and, specifically, the drinking water section. These homes are really only 100’ above the aquifer. The people that use Hazardville and Connecticut Water Company have treated water. She is using that water straight and whatever is in that water is in her home. Ms. Vose stated her well is 230’ and it still pulls up sand at times.
Edward Allen, 172 Old Farms, the historian of the Hazardville Institute Conservancy, stated he is the author of the magazine article and video entitled “Legend of Powder Hollow.” He presented a map to the Commission. He asked that Commission members look down near the word Hazardville near the bottom. Over to the left are the words “proving ground” and “proof house.” This means it is referring to about four hundred acres of historic land, the ancestral Podunk campground, which was bought by the Hazard Powder Company to manufacture black gun powder. Forty percent of the gun powder used in the civil war by the union army came out of Hazardville. Sixty-eight people lost their lives manufacturing this dangerous product. One of them was Horace Hazard, the twenty-one year old son of Colonel Hazard. He died on the proving ground. The proving ground is just about where the entrance road to the gravel pit would be. He described how they tested powder and stated the area is almost to the foot of Long Hollow Hill.
Mr. Allen stated this is an important area and it is important to know that the gravel pit is contiguous to the Scantic River Park and it juts into that 400 acres where there used to be 200 buildings contiguous to the powder company. He would like to see at least a portion of this land retained by the Scantic River Park because it is a real occasion to develop some of Enfield’s heritage and to remember all those people that lived on Cedar Street, Fairmont Avenue and North Maple Street who devoted themselves to this art.
Dave McClintock, 19 Powder Hill Road, stated he has the same concerns about sidewalks and the sewer system. He purchased his home two years ago. He had the water tested and the test came back phenomenal. His well is 275’ down. He plans on being at the location for a long time and he questioned what happens in fifteen to thirty years. Will the area be contaminated? He wishes someone could give him answers so that he could be assured that his well would not eventually be contaminated causing him to tap into a water source.
Margaret Jedziniak, Abbe Road, presented a drawing of all the aquifers in the area. The whole hollow is full of them and this is why there is such a concern by the people. Ms. Jedziniak stated the engineer mentions that the Hazardville Water well is 5,000’ away. She asked if that was measured on a straight line or around the curve because to her it doesn’t appear to be 5,000’ away from the area the engineer spoke about. Ms. Jedziniak believes homes in this area would not be compatible with the proposed Scantic River Park which already is in progress in the area. She thinks it would be a disservice to the community to have a building in close proximity to the area which has been under consideration for years as a park. Just the chemicals from the lawns would pollute the Scantic River. Ms. Jedziniak hopes that any problems that may occur in the area will not cost the taxpayers of Enfield in case of erosion like it did in the Buckhorn area. She questioned building on top of a water supply and stated this is not proper and this zone change should be denied.
Paul Serro, 55 Kennedy Drive, stated a failed septic system would come to the top, to the storm sewer and to the Scantic River. He is a member of the Scantic River Watershed Association. He noted there is presently a lot that goes into the river and he would hate to add to it. He is in favor of keeping the zoning R-88.
Mr. Steele responded to the public concerns. He stated the Commission heard many issues tonight specifically related to site development and not relevant to the proposed zone change. Such comments would be relevant in the next step which is a subdivision application. All these steps will be reviewed by the town and all the governing agencies. The DEP does not have jurisdiction over this matter. The water companies with their aquifer do and they have issued comments. With regard to conversations with the water company, Mr. Steele has spoken with responsible persons for both water companies and he has explained exactly what they are planning to do. In general, residential uses in an aquifer area are an appropriate use.
Mr. Steele stated it was mentioned about Buckhorn. He is personally a resident of the Buckhorn area. It is a completely different situation. Those were homes that were built up high on top of soils. This site is completely different. He questioned if this area is of high concern for things like erosion or water quality. Mr. Steele stated this is probably the best type of situation that you can have because you have a bowl contained on three sides with only one way out creating a very controlled situation. In his opinion, this is not a hazardous area or an area inappropriate for residential development. Mr. Steele stated he doesn’t believe the town has made any offer to the applicant at this time to purchase the property as open space. As he spoke with both members of the water company, Mr. Steele stated their conclusion was under the R-88 zone, a maximum of ten lots can be developed. With the zone changed to R-44, there would be an additional four lots. Both members of the water companies responsible for reviewing and commenting on activities within these areas agreed that this was not a significant difference. Mr. Steele stated he feels it is completely reasonable for this Commission to come to the same conclusion.
Mr. Ursery stated there was a lot of talk about fertilizers and pesticides. He noted whether this is developed as R-88 or R-44, the road length is the same, approximately 1,200’. If you look at the lots, you will see that the R-88 subdivision simply has more frontage to gain the area needed to get the 88,000 square feet. In terms of lawn area and fertilizers, whether there are ten lots or fourteen lots, the amount of lawn area is going to be the same and the amount of fertilizer or pesticide is going to be the same whether it is R-88 or R-44.
Mr. Ursery discussed septic systems. He noted the state health code is very specific as to what they are allowed to do and how the septic system is designed. The North Central Health District which does the review for any septic systems in the Town of Enfield is one of the strictest health districts in the State of Connecticut. Mr. Ursery stated anything they do at this site will be designed by professional engineers, reviewed by them and will be in compliance with the State of Connecticut health code. Mr. Ursery stated it is his opinion that no matter what the number of lots are, the septic systems are not an issue with regard to the aquifer, wells and water quality.
Chairman DiPace asked if sewers have been considered in lieu of septic systems. Mr. Ursery stated they did look at a concept of going to senior or active adult housing which yielded a much larger number of units. This would have allowed the developer to bring sanitary sewer to the property. However, they felt the Commission and the town in general would be more in favor of single-family residential. The closest sewer line is all the way down at the intersection of Abbe Road to the south. There is also sewer available at the bridge at South Maple where there is a pump station. Mr. Ursery stated for a ten or fourteen lot subdivision, the cost of bringing sanitary sewer to the site is something not doable.
Mr. Giner stated the comment he would have from a planning point of view is it is not necessarily a public benefit to bring water to the site absent any concerns regarding water quality because it tends to open up an area for more intensive development.
Chairman DiPace stated he hears a lot of concerns regarding the septic systems. He brought up the Town of Somers which has Level B aquifers and they do not have a major sewer system. Mr. Ursery stated the Town of Somers does have a very small sewer system and a treatment plan located on the Scantic River on Quality Avenue. This serves a very small area and the residential development in Somers is probably ninety percent on septic systems.
Commissioner Duren stated this property can be developed as an R-88. The question before the Commission is whether to change it to R-44 to allow more density.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the audience for a second time.
William Ranny, 17 Powder Hill Road, questioned what is to stop them from going beyond the fourteen houses once the zone is changed. Chairman DiPace stated they will not fit and it would be impossible to build on the existing slopes.
Mrs. L. L. Collins stated her home was built on the powder mill property and she is against the proposed zone change.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to approve the zone change from R-88 to R-44 for the 25+ acre parcel on the east side of Powder Hill Road as heard in Public Hearing #2541.
Commissioner Jones had a concern if the zone is changed to R-44, the Commission would not have any legs to stand on for stopping any future zone changes to R-44. When you look at the Plan of Conservation and Development, Commissioner Jones noted the intended purpose is to slow down the density. In this particular area, it may be only a four house increase, but Commissioner Jones has a concern about the balance of the area.
Chairman DiPace stated he also had a concern that if this property is rezoned to R-44, what impact will it have on the abutting area. He stated after driving through the property, it would actually be very minimal. The rest of the property zoned R-88 is zoned that way because the slopes would prohibit building. Chairman DiPace stated there is not a lot of buildable property in this area. He assessed what is there and how the area could be developed. Currently there is a gravel pit with trucks going back and forth to the property. One way to get rid of the truck traffic is to have the property developed. When you look at four additional homes, the result is the capping of this gravel pit and the installation of a small residential development. The applicant is proposing fourteen lots and there is no way more could be added to this property due to the topography. Chairman DiPace felt there would be little impact with this zone change. There is a new bridge going in and the truck traffic to the gravel pit would be eliminated. Chairman DiPace stated he drives this area quite often and he doesn’t see heavy traffic in the area. The Plan of Development is a guide for the Commission and other zones in town have been changed. If this area stays a gravel pit, there is the potential for more truck traffic. He doesn’t see how the proposed zone change will negatively impact the area. As far as the aquifer, there are already septic systems in this area and there are septic systems on top of aquifers all through the town. Chairman DiPace noted these concerns would have to be addressed during the subdivision application and not the zone change application.
Commissioner Cooper stated he sees no reason to change the zone from R-88 to R-44 and to him it appears that a change would constitute spot zoning.
The motion was denied by a 2 – 5 – 0 vote. Commissioners Sarno and DiPace voted in favor; Commissioners Ballard, Duren, Cooper, Jones, and Ladd, Alternate, voted nay.
PUBLIC HEARINGS – NEW
a. PH#2548 – Special Use Permit for accessory automotive parts retail use in an industrial district at 72 Shaker Road, zoned I-1, Map 76, Lot 243, Autopart International, Applicant/Robert E. Schmidt General Marital Trust, Owner. (Must close by May 11)
Michael Shaw appeared before the Commission representing Robert E. Schmidt General Marital Trust. He stated he is a real estate manager for Autopart International, a company that has been in business since 1957. They started out as a commercial, foreign auto parts distributor. They sell primarily to dealerships, tire stores, Midas Muffler, gas stations and people that repair cars. Ninety-five percent of their stock is delivered via small Toyota pickups. They have 65 stores throughout New England and upper New York State and they are owned by Advanced Autoparts. About five percent of their business is incidental retail but there is no retail showroom.
Commissioner Duren found the application a little confusing since the map submitted was for the child early learning center. This business will locate around the corner from the learning center. Mr. Shaw stated that is correct.
Commissioner Duren asked if the business will have a parts counter. Mr. Shaw stated there is a parts counter not for retail customers but for their drivers.
Mr. Giner stated the map submitted was to show the location of this business. The Commission is approving the interior. The Secretary is not being asked to sign this site plan. The plan before the Commission is an existing plan and is presented to show where the parking is located.
Commissioner Duren asked what type of traffic this business would generate because of the close proximity to the child learning center. Chairman DiPace noted the trucks will be driving through the designated play area.
Mr. Giner stated the application is for the retail area which is a special permit use. The industrial use of warehousing and distribution is a permitted use.
Chairman DiPace asked if this is the right area for a parts store when the town removed a parts store in the area a couple of years ago. Mr. Shaw stated they are not a retail parts store. The only thing that will come in the back door at this site is their deliveries by large trucks. This occurs once a month. The small trucks that deliver the parts will be running in and out of the front.
Mr. Shaw stated they are not like a NAPA or Autozone. People call on the phone and the parts are delivered. Customers coming to the site are very rare.
Mr. Giner stated the regulations were changed to allow retail in industrial zones at the request of Olympia Sales. It is now allowed as long as the square footage used for retail does not exceed ten percent of their business.
Chairman DiPace stated NAPA received a cease and desist order in 2000. Mr. Shaw stated the NAPA stores do have a retail section. Chairman DiPace stated this store ended up having to move. It was his intent to make sure the Commission is being fair.
Mr. Shaw stated their square footage for retail is very limited or about 250 square feet. There are no big displays and their limit on an item like oil is twenty-five cases.
Mr. Giner stated the building is existing and was approved for industrial use as a spec and tenants change all the time. Chairman DiPace stated there will be licensing requirements for businesses such as this in the future and this business will have to register under new regulations that are being adopted for aquifer protection. Every business will be required to apply to the DEP for such a permit and will be subject to their review.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public. No one spoke in favor or against this application.
Mr. Giner stated the area proposed for retail for this business is approximately 200 square feet and they have about 6,100 square feet. They are allowed up to 600 square feet in the area in front of the counter and the request is for 200 square feet.
Chairman DiPace closed this hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to approve PH #2548 - Special Use Permit for accessory automotive parts retail use in an industrial district at 72 Shaker Road, Zoned I-1, Map 76, Lot 243, Autopart International, Applicant/ Robert E. Schmidt General Marital Trust, Owner, in accordance with the application record and the following conditions:
Conditions to be Met Prior to Signing of Certificate:
1. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns.
Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits:
2. This approval will become effective upon the filing of a Special Use Zoning Certificate signed by the Commission Secretary on the Land records by the owner of the property. Proof of such filing shall be in the file prior to the issuance of any permits.
3. The applicant shall comply with any applicable requirements of the Building or Fire Codes.
General Conditions:
4. This approval is for the specific use and structures identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the structures will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.
5. The sales use shall be operated in compliance with Section 6.30.4 of the Enfield Zoning Regulations.
6. A building permit, if necessary, for the construction of facilities as approved must be obtained within a year of the effective date of this approval or the permit shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission in accordance with Section 9.20.3 of the Enfield Zoning Regulations.
7. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.
The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternates Lefakis and Ladd voting.
b. PH#2549 – Modification of conditions imposed on previous application to allow a shed for a community garden behind the Senior Center, 299 Elm Street, zoned I-1, Map 75, Lot 51 and 102, Town of Enfield, Senior Center, Applicant for the Town of Enfield. (Must close by May 11).
Susan Lather, Director of the Senior Center, and Henry Dutcher, President of the Enfield Rotary Club, appeared before the Commission regarding this application. Mr. Dutcher stated they are working on a community garden to benefit the food banks in town. The Enfield Town Council has already given approval for it to be on land behind the Senior Center. Tonight’s application is for a shed to store materials on the site.
Mr. Dutcher stated the garden will be approximately one-third of an acre. There will be handicap accessibility to it. This is an aquifer zone and the garden will be an organic garden. There will be no pesticides, no herbicides and all fertilizers will be organic.
Chairman DiPace felt this is a wonderful activity for the community. Mr. Dutcher stated they have over fifteen community volunteers wanting to garden and help out.
Commissioner Duren thinks this is great. He also would like to see an actual community garden center in the future where people like him who do not have room for a garden in their own yards can garden. Commissioner Duren asked if a well is being proposed as shown on the map. Mr. Dutcher stated that well has been withdrawn. Connecticut Water Company is going to provide them with a seasonal meter and run it off their water main.
Commissioner Duren asked about the compost bin. Mr. Dutcher stated the compost bin is actually not a structure but will be compost piles. The Commission would not be approving the well or the compost bin. Mr. Dutcher stated there will now be no need for a generator because a well is not proposed. The shed would be for storage only.
Commissioner Duren asked about the pattern of the garden. Mr. Dutcher stated it is a circle with gravel paths as needed for the wheelchair accessibility. The other paths will be mulch. They plan on building up some of the areas so that people in wheelchairs are able to garden. Mr. Giner stated these would not be considered structures for zoning purposes.
Commissioner Jones brought up an email received from Neil Angus regarding the location of the garden. Mr. Dutcher stated the site plan before the Commission is back a little further than they actually intend on being. They are about fifty feet closer to the Senior Center than what the site plan shows. Some discussion followed on the barn previously located in this area.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the audience. No one spoke in favor or against the application. Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Cooper to approve PH#2549 –Modification of conditions imposed on previous application to allow a shed for a community garden behind the Senior Center, 299 Elm Street, zoned I-1, Map 75, Lot 51 and 102, Town of Enfield, Senior Center, Applicant for the Town of Enfield. This approval is subject to conformance with the submitted record, as may be required to be modified by these conditions, and the following conditions:
Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits:
1. This approval will become effective upon the filing of a Special Use Zoning Certificate signed by the Commission Secretary on the Land records by the owner of the property. Proof of such filing shall be in the file prior to the issuance of any permits.
Conditions which must be met prior to the Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance:
2. Final Inspection will be required.
General Conditions:
3. This approval is for the specific use and structures identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the structures will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.
|