Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Town Resources
  • Agendas & Minutes
  • Forms, Documents & Permits
  • Pay Bill Online
  • GIS/Maps
  • Contacts Directory
  • Subscribe to News
  • Live Stream and Recorded Video
  • Charter & Ordinances
  • Employment Opportunities
  • RFPs / Legal Notices
  • 250th Anniversary
  • Casino Development Agreement
 
09/27/2005 Minutes

TOWN OF EAST WINDSOR
        Planning and Zoning Commission

        Public Hearing #1462
        September 27, 2005

                
Draft Document - Subject to Commission Approval

The meeting was called to order at 7:34 P. M. by  Chairman Guiliano in the Meeting Room of the Town Hall, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, CT.

ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM:

A quorum was established as four Regular Members (Filipone, Gowdy, Guiliano, Rodrigue)  and three Alternate Members (Kehoe, Ouellette and Tyler) were present.  Regular Member Saunders was absent.     Chairman Guiliano noted Alternate Commissioner Kehoe will sit in on any new hearings/applications this evening, Alternate Commissioner Ouellette will sit in on the Letourneau hearing.    Also present was Town Planner Whitten.

ADDED AGENDA ITEMS:

Town Planner Whitten noted she has received a request for Bond release from Marti Zhigailo; she suggested considering the request under Item V.

RECEIPT OF APPLICATIONS:

Chairman Guiliano noted receipt of the following Applications:

1.      Application of Marjorie Myette, Trustee, for a 5-lot subdivision located at 15 Plantation Road (known as Plantation Pines).  [A-1 Zone; Map 40, Block 49, Lot 10].

2.      Application of Fortunato Construction Group for re-approval of Special Permit and Site Plan Approval of 16 condominium units in 3 buildings at Scantic Glen, Old Ellington Road.  [SDD Zone; Map 30, Block 32, Lot 8].

3.      Application of Stanley J. Kement, Jr., SJK Properties, LLC, for a 48-lot subdivision located on the north side of Depot Street (known as Quarry Meadows).  [R-3 Zone; Map 27, Block 77, Lots 6 & 9].

4.      Application of Felica McIntosh for a Special Use Permit to allow an in-law apartment at 123 Tromley Road, owned by Homes by Guarino.  [A-1 Zone; Map 29, Block 19, Lot 52-2].

5.      Application of White Pine, LLC for a 2-lot subdivision located at 22 Wagner Lane, owned by TJL Investment Trust, LLC (subdividing warehouse portion from larger parcel}.  [M-1 and B-1 Zones; Map 13, Block 11, Lots 1 & 3].

6.      Application of White Pine, LLC for SDD, Site Plan Approval and Special Use Permit for 12 single-family condominiums at 22 Wagner Lane, owned by TJL Investment Trust, (Phase I, Wagner Terrace).  [M-1 & B-1 Zone; Map 13, Block 11, Lots 2 & 3].

LEGAL NOTICE:

The following Legal Notice, which appeared in the Journal Inquirer on Thursday, September 15, 2005, and Thursday, September 22, 2005, was read by Commissioner Rodrigue:

        1)      Application of Arturo Therecka for a Special Use Permit/Sale of Alcohol to              allow the sale of beer and wine at pizza restaurant located at 140 South Main           Street, owned by Joseph F. and Linda Roberts.  [B-2 Zone; Map 33, Block 5,              Lot 63A].

        2)      Application of Myers Nursery, Inc., for a 2-lot subdivision and Special Use             Permit for 1 rear lot located on the west side of East Road.  [A-1 Zone; Map            10, Block 53, Lot 2].

PERFORMANCE BONDS - ACTIONS; PERMIT EXTENSIONS:  Alan K. Tracy - Request for release of erosion control bond for Tracy Car Wash, 159 Prospect Hill Road:

Town Planner Whitten noted Town Engineer Norton has recommended releasing $14,000 of the $16,000 Bond and retain $2,000 until the site is stabilized.

MOTION:         At the recommendation of Town Engineer Norton that we approve the release of $14,000 of the Erosion Control Bond, leaving $2,000 remaining to be held until the site has been stabilized completely.

Filipone moved/Rodrigue seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:  Unanimous     
 
PERFORMANCE BONDS - ACTIONS; PERMIT EXTENSIONS: Marti Zhigailo
-  Request for release/reduction of Erosion and Sedimentation Bond and cash passbook bond for Melrose Place Subdivision, Pease Road:
MOTION: To GO OUT OR ORDER to hear the request for reduction of Construction Bond for Melrose Plac e Subdivision.

Gowdy moved/Rodrigue seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:  Unanimous

Chairman Guiliano READ FOR THE RECORD memo dated 9/27/2005 from Town Engineer Norton regarding the results of his site visit, and his recommendation for Bond reduction.

Commissioner Gowdy noted the vegetation/grass seed has started today.   Chairman Guiliano suggested it has not yet established itself; he would like to keep the Bond in place until that occurs.  

MOTION: At the recommendation of Town Engineer Norton under memo dated 9/27/2005 to REDUCE the bonding for the site to $14,160 to be maintained until the pavement patch is repaired and as-built submitted, and for the Erosion and Sedimentation Bond to REMAIN IN PLACE until vegetation is established.

Filipone moved/Rodrigue seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:  Unanimous

CONTINUED HEARINGS:  Four Fathers, Inc. dba Sports World - Text Amendment to Section 8.1.5 Alcoholic Beverages, to allow Cafe’ Permits in an M-1 Zone when incidental to the operation of a sports arena, recreational club, catering establishment, hotel or motel.  (Deadline to close hearing extended to 9/27/05):

Chairman Guiliano read the Hearing description.  He referenced receipt of letter from the Applicant requesting an extension until October 11, 2005 due to a death in the family.

MOTION:         To GRANT AN EXTENSION until 10/11/2005 for the Text Amendment to Section 8.1.5 Alcoholic Beverages, to allow Cafe’ Permits in an M-1 Zone when incidental to the operation of a sports arena, recreational club, catering establishment, hotel or motel as requested by Joseph P. Abele, General Manager, Sports World under letter dated 9/27/2005.

Filipone moved/Rodrigue seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:  Unanimous

NEW HEARING:  Arturo Therecka - Special Use Permit/Sale of Alcohol to allow the sale of  beer and wine at pizza restaurant located at 140 South Main Street, owned by Joseph F. and Linda Roberts.  [B-2 Zone; Map 33, Block 5, Lot 63A] TO BE WITHDRAWN - ALREADY PERMITTED BASED ON PREVIOUS APPROVALS:

Chairman Guiliano read the Hearing description, noting this Application has been withdrawn.  Town Planner Whitten noted letter included in Commissioner’s packer; Chairman Guiliano READ SAME FOR THE RECORD.

NEW HEARING:  Myers Nursery, Inc. - 2-lot subdivision and Special Use Permit for 1 rear lot located on the west side of East Road.  [A-1 Zone; Map 10, Block 53, Lot 2].  (Deadline to close hearing 11/1/05):

Town Planner Whitten noted this Application was put on the Agenda, but the Applicant has not yet received their Wetlands approval.   She suggested the item will be put on the Agenda for October 11th meeting.

MOTION: To RESCHEDULE the Public Hearing on the Application of Myers Nursery, Inc. - 2-lot subdivision and Special Use Permit for 1 rear lot located on the west side of East Road.  [A-1 Zone; Map 10, Block 53, Lot 2].  until the Commission’s regularly scheduled meeting on October 11, 2005 at 7:30 P. M. in the Meeting Room, Town Hall, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, CT.

Gowdy moved/Filipone seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:  Unanimous

OLD BUSINESS:  Letourneau Builders - Special Use Permit for a 33-unit Active Adult Housing development (Norton Fields) located on the west side of Rye Street [R-2 Zone; Map 31, Block 40, Lot 17]. (Hearing closed 9/13/05; deadline for decision 11/17/05):

Chairman Guiliano read the Hearing description, noting Commissioner Ouellette will sit in on this Application.   Town Planner Whitten questioned if the exhibits should be brought out?   Chairman Guiliano replied affirmatively.

Commissioner Gowdy indicated he has a few issues with this Application, he is concerned about the Sewer Avoidance Areas as it’s still in the Regulations; failure to comply could jeopardize Federal/State funding.  According to State officials it’s the WPCA’s responsibility to adhere to plan, and if it’s not adhered to the Town may have difficulty getting State funding for future sewers issues.  WPCA is supposed to refer proposed sewer extensions to the DEP for review and approval.  Complicating things further the most recent OPM map for East Windsor released July 15, 2005 shows a growth area boundary quite dimenished from the SSA and SAA Map shows.   This may need to be brought up with the DEP and OPM in conjunction with the WPCA and the PZC for further discussion.  He indicated he has issues with that; he would hate to jeopardize the Town’s funding.  He is also concerned with comments in the traffic study and what is clarified as a main artery, which they consider Norton Road to be.  He is concerned with their 85 percentile which would mean they were going at an estimated speed of 50 miles per hour for Rye Street, which he feels would be fast for the configuration of the road.  Commissioner Gowdy is also not sure it fits into the neighborhood, and he doesn’t think it would; he felt it would have an adverse impact, the traffic impacts will have an adverse impact on the rural character of the neighbor.   He has many concerns with the project.

Commissioner Filipone agreed on the Sewer Avoidance Area issue, and it has been a policy in the past to adhere to the current Sewer Avoidance Area, and until that’s changed officially he didn’t think they should deviate from that previous policy.  He also agreed it wouldn’t fit in the neighborhood; these types of developments are kind of tucked away from public visibility - Scantic Glen, Depot Street, Coleman Farms are screened by a buffer, they’re not just stuck out in the open of the neighborhood.   He also felt there would be some impact on traffic.  

With regard to property values, Commissioner Filipone felt there was a possibility that they could be impacted but he didn’t think there was enough proof presented, or enough history to justify that there won’t be; he felt it was a questionable thing.  Although the project does meet  the intent of  the Plan of Development (POD) with regard to diverse housing he didn’t feel it’s the right place for it.  Regarding the Open Space configuration he didn’t like the road within, and the 50% buffer was intended to surround the development, and not just one side of it.   Even though it was changed from 50-something to 33 units the configuration is laid out for possible future plans in mind.    If the road was reconfigured with the Open Space around it as the Commission suggested a couple of meetings ago it might have been more a little more palatable; probably not, I just don’t think it’s the right place for it.

Commissioner Rodrigue indicated he did agree on the Sewer Avoidance Area issue, but they have put their project together well, there have been many committees that have looked at it and somewhat agreed with it that it would work, and provide a source for other neighbors up the road that have problems.   There are many houses along Norton Road that have failing septic systems; it would help those people there.   Regarding the traffic impact as with any development anywhere there will be a traffic impact; you add one house it impacts it.  They spent a lot of time designing this project; they have traffic studies to prove that it’s not adversely hurting the neighbors by means of documentation.  My personal opinions may be different but they’ve proved them by documentation.  With regard to property values, Commissioner Rodrigue agreed with Commissioner Filipone; you can’t prove it one way of the other.  If a neighbor leaves their garbage out in the yard it will reduce your property values, never mind the whole neighborhood.  Commissioner Rodrigue felt to say it doesn’t fit the area is somewhat of a misconception, because any kind of development that you do, whether it’s 3 houses or multi-houses, you already industrial there; it is a main thoroughfare; it’s not a true residential road as people think it is.  And there are  multiple zones on that road from point a to point b, from the South Windsor line all the way up.   Commissioner Rodrigue felt they put a lot of time into the development to try to work with the Regulations and the rules that are there and the counts that are there.  They originally wanted more, and they came back with what was still open, and they took the residual value that we put a cap on and went for that.   What their intent for the future is has nothing to do with this permit and we shouldn’t even think about that.  As far as architectural design that’s a minor item; he didn’t think the Commission should be thinking about architectural designs.   Commissioner Filipone suggested the designs were quite nice.   Commissioner Rodrigue concurred, but felt that’s not what the Commission should be thinking about, it should be PZC criteria, not so much colors and styles, that’s a personal issue.  Commisssioner Gowdy felt the Commission had a right to consider those items if they didn’t fit with the neighborhood, although these did fit well with this area.  He felt it was a concern of this Commission.   Commissioner Rodrigue felt it may be a concern but it isn’t written that the Commission can say a log cabin or raised ranch could go or couldn’t; he felt it depended on whomever was placing that on the property.  It’s like what type of car you like.   If it meets the criteria it’s not a matter of what it looks like.   Chairman Guiliano felt the Commission did have that right.  Commissioner Rodrigue felt it wasn’t an item that should be brought up for this application.  He suggested there were some items that might not fall within the best means of the property but we do have the availability of sewer, water down the road and is available; maybe it does cross a path that we don’t want it to but there really isn’t a lot of open property in this town with sewers without extending the sewers.  I think that’s the only real tough point that they have to cross, not so much the other issues of how many, or how they’re located, or traffic; all those have been proved.  It goes back to sewer and water, if there’s an approval from DEP and they give a blessing then we should approve it.  If they get approval on that then it takes it out of our hands for that.  It reduces the responsibility of making a decision on that.  

Commissioner Gowdy felt a main artery, and that’s what it’s classified as by the State, it makes a difference where that main artery is.   Rye Street, as a main artery, might be different than Kreyssig Road as a main artery, which it isn’t.  There’s a difference when you’re talking about that being class A, B, C, or D, so from the engineering point of view there is no question; who is he to question the engineering?   But he felt the engineering point of view doesn’t take into consideration the locale that it’s in; that main artery on that road might be different than the main artery for Tromley Road, which he questioned was a good comparison.  Commissioner Gowdy felt it did make a difference.  He questioned Commissioner Ouellette what Rye Street was classified as; Commissioner Ouellette felt it was classified as a major collector, which he indicated are defined based on average daily traffic.  Chairman Guiliano felt what Commissioner Gowdy was implying was that in the POD Rye Street was considered a main artery.  Commissioner Gowdy suggested he didn’t know if it met the definitions of a main artery but it obviously carried a lot of traffic.   Commissioner Ouellette questioned what that meant to Commissioner Gowdy; he didn’t follow his logic.  Commissioner Gowdy felt if cars go down there at 50 mph without doing any reconfiguration of that road he felt that wasn’t a good thing.   Commissioner Ouellette suggested that happens all around this area; this is no different than any other surrounding town; that’s just the way it is.  That’s not acceptable but that’s just the way it is.  Commissioner Gowdy felt two wrongs don’t make a right; he cited the issue Commissioner Ouellette had brought up on Norton Road.   Commissioner Ouellette suggested that’s why he differs from Commissioner Gowdy’s opinion, as he felt they have taken a number of steps, and done the best job they can, to satisfy the criteria to make it safe.   There are a numer of things they can’t control, the speed of approaching cars, the only way to reduce that number is enforcement, and that’s a manpower issue.   But they’ve demonstrated some engineering techniques, they’ve gotten the required sightlines, they’re very careful in their intersection designs; it wasn’t sloppy.  Commissioner Ouellette suggested in his view he didn’t really think there was an adverse traffic impact associated with this development.  Granted, there will be more cars on the road; it’s no different than any other project.   You just approved a project down the street that probably has more of an impact as far as the number of cars per day.  He didn’t recall the Commission debating that at all.  

Commissioner Ouellette acknowledged that he did disagree on the traffic impact, however, he suggested he’s struggling with the issue of the Sewer Avoidance Area.   He noted that all the evidence that he’s read through  and previous discussion proves this project is in the SAA; he has a problem with that.  Regarding the comments that this development doesn’t fit the character of the area, to him it’s not a good fit.  Some of the other developments were clusterd housing, to him it’s right out in the middle.  

Chairman Guiliano indicated he agreed with most of the comments.  He did agree with Commissioner Ouellette that whatever is built in this area it will produce as much traffic and he felt they did a good job on that.  He suggested he didn’t feel it fit the area, and he didn’t feel that at this time the Town needed any more Active Adult Housing.   He noted the Town has a cap, the Town isn’t even close to the cap as far as the number of units built, it may never get to 260.  He suggested he would like to see it get a little closer to 260 before the Commission adds more to it, and possibly have a glut.  Chairman Guiliano indicated that one thing that’s important to him, we take into consideration, being a Special Permit, this was open to the public.   There was a big opinion in the Town being against it and he felt that at some point the Commission needs to listen to the people in the town.   It was a Public Hearing.

Commissioner Gowdy felt the Commissioner needed to be careful, that’s an isolated segment.  Chairman Guiliano concurred; he agreed it was the neighbors around there and they have an opinion also.  Commissioner Gowdy concurred.  Chairman Guiliano felt that should be part of the Commission’s thinking also.  Commissioner Ouellette questioned if, with regard to Special Permits, there was language in the Regulations that a certain percentage of the abutting properties  need a 3/4 vote of the Commission?  Town Planner Whitten and the Commission didn’t recall such language; Town Planner Whitten suggested he may be talking about petitions for Public Hearings.   Commissioner Ouellette questioned language that applied to properties within a certain distance of an application.  Town Planner Whitten suggested that doesn’t apply to this Application.

Commissioner Kehoe suggested that to him the Sewer Avoidance Area is one thing.   He also agrees with Commissioner Rodrigue and Commissioner Ouellette regarding traffic.   He suggested his only issue was with regard to a previous community survey done by the Commission, that survey indicated that 52% of the people in town said we need elderly housing, but only 4% of the people have moved into the Active Adult Housing in town.  Chairman Guiliano suggested, in his opinion, elderly housing was different than Active Adult Housing.  Commissioner Kehoe concurred, but suggested it’s getting lumped into the same definition.  Town’s people said they would not move into a 55 and over; this would be for new people; this wouldn’t serve our residents.   Chairman Guiliano suggested he didn’t know that for a fact.

Chairman Guiliano queried Commissioner Tyler for comments; he noted that although he hadn’t been present at some of the Hearings he understood that Commissioner Tyler had read the documentation.   Commissioner Tyler suggested he wasn’t comfortable making comments, but he did suggest that at some time this piece of property will be developed, and he has no idea what will go in there.   It could be a 4 lot subdivision, or a 10 lot subdivision, or 2 story houses, or something less desirable than smaller Active Adult Housing.  

Commissioner Filipone questioned, with regard to the waivers, the reason for the cape cod vs the standard curb, was it aesthetics, was it cost, was it durability?   Commissioner Gowdy was under the impression that it was easier for fire and emergency vehicles to go over cape cod curbing, as well as aesthetics.   Commissioner Tyler suggested you’re less likely to throw a car back into the traveled lane than a standard curb; it’s more of a safety issue.  But, it also allows a car to go over the curb into the sidewalk more easily.  

MOTION TO APPROVE WAIVERS:
1.      To eliminate curbs and sidewalks along Rye and Norton Roads as none currently exist.

Gowdy moved/Filipone seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:  Unanimous

MOTION TO APPROVE WAIVERS:
2.      To provide cape code curbing within the development in lieu of standard curbing.

Gowdy moved/Filipone seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:  Unanimous

MOTION TO APPROVE the application of owner Letourneau Builders for a Special Permit and Site Plan Approval for a 33 unit Active Adult Community at property located between Rye Street and Norton Road a.k.a. Map 31, Block 40, Lot 17, R-2 Zone.
This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans (as may be modified by the Commission) and the following conditions:

The Commission should state reasons for their vote for the record.

Referenced Plans:

“Cover Sheet – Norton Fields, Active Adult Housing, Prepared for Letourneau Builders, East Windsor CT, prepared by Aeschliman Land Surveying, PC, 1379 Main Street, East Hartford Conn 06108, 860/528-4881, , dated 4/14/05, rev. 4/27/05, rev. 5/4/05, rev. 7/5/05

Including Sheets dated 4/14/05, last revised 4/27/05; 7/5/05:
·       2/8     Site Plan, scale 1” = 40’
·       3 & 3A/8        Landscape Plan 1” = 40’
·       4-7/8   Plan & Profiles
·       8/8     General Notes and Details       
·       Sightline Plan Norton Fields, Adult Housing Development, prepared for Letourneau Builders, East Windsor, CT , revised 8/23/05

Conditions that must be met prior to signing of mylars:

1.      The applicant shall submit a paper copy of the final approved plans to the Town Planner for review and comment prior to the submission of the final mylar copies for signing by the Commission.
2.      Two sets of mylar plans shall be submitted to the Commission for signature.  All plans shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for preparation of the plans. (One paper set of the Floor Plans and Elevation shall be submitted for signature.)
3.      The final plans shall contain the street numbers (unit numbers) assigned by the East Windsor Assessor’s Office.
4.      The conditions of this approval shall be binding upon the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns. A copy of this approval motion shall be filed in the land records prior to the signing of the final mylars.

Conditions that must be met prior to the issuance of any permits:

5.      The applicant and/or developer shall schedule and attend a pre-construction meeting with the Town Planner and Town staff prior to the issuance of any permits or the start of construction.
6.      Final architectural elevations and floor plans shall be approved by the Town Planner and/or Commission.
7.      One copy of the final site plan shall be filed on the land records.
8.      A Zoning Permit for site work must be applied for and approved prior to the start of construction. Three sets of the final approved plans shall be submitted at this time.
9.      A detailed sediment and erosion control plan for the entire development shall be submitted at the time of application for the site improvement Zoning Permit.  The plan shall include the engineers estimated costs for E&S controls.  The Town Engineer will review the plan and cost estimates and will set the E&S bond amount.
10.     A cash (escrow) or passbook bond shall be submitted for sedimentation and erosion control maintenance and site restoration during the construction of the project.  (Side bond must be in place before any permits will be issued). Any funds that may be withdrawn by the Town for such maintenance or restoration shall be replaced within five (5) days or this permit shall be rendered null and void.
11.     A bond, suitable to the Town, shall be submitted for all site improvements (road & drainage). The applicant's engineer shall submit an estimated cost of the site improvements to the Town Engineer and the final amount of the bond shall be determined by the Town Engineer. (Said bond shall be in place before any permits are issued.)
12.     A landscape bond, suitable to the town, shall be submitted for all street trees, landscaping and wetlands plantings.  The applicant’s landscape specialist shall prepare an estimated cost to the Town Planner and the final amount shall be determined by staff.  Said bond shall be in place prior to any permits being issued.
13.     A Zoning Permit is required for each building.
14.     Foundation as-built surveys for each building shall be submitted and approved before framing and/or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.   Builder should be aware that minimum separating distances (18’  minimum if not parallel, 22‘ minimum if parallel (See sec 5.1.17.15) are from fully built units, inclusive of walls.  
15.     Some units are placed at minimum separating distances.  Such units will not receive Certificates of Occupancy until an as-built of the fully constructed units inclusive of walls and finished siding are supplied.
16.     All buildings/units must be identified by meeting the East Windsor House Numbering Ordinance requirements.
17.     Additional requirements and procedures may be implemented by the Town Planner.

Conditions that must be met prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy:

18.     Final approval and connection fees must be paid for WPCA connections on individual units prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
19.     Site improvements must be completed up-to and around the individual unit at the time of CO.
20.     Final grading, seeding, landscaping shall be in place or the E&S bond will not be released      or reduced.
21.     Additional bonding may be required by the Planning Department.
22.     All legal documents related to age/occupancy restrictions and the Common Interest Ownership Community shall be approved by the Town Attorney and filed on the land records.
23.     All inspection fees must be paid.

Conditions which that be met prior to the issuance of any certificates of compliance:

24.     Iron pins must be in place at all lot corners and angle points.
25.     A paper copy of the final as-built showing all structures, pins, roads, walks, driveways, drainage systems, and final floor elevations as well as grades shall be submitted and approved by the Planner.
26.     A final as-built mylar of the entire project shall be submitted and signed by the Commission.
27.     All public health and safety components of the project must be satisfactorily completed prior to occupancy. In cases where all public health and safety components have been completed, the Zoning Official may issue a Certificate of Zoning Compliance provided a suitable bond is retained for any remaining site work.  
28.     All landscaping elements included in the approved landscaping plan shall be maintained in a manner sufficient to ensure its continuing performance and survival of all plantings.

General Conditions:

29.     This special permit/site plan approval shall expire five years from date of approval.  Failure to complete all required improvements within that time shall invalidate the approval. The developer may request an extension of time to complete the improvements from the Commission, in accordance the Connecticut General Statutes. The Commission shall require proper bonding be in place prior to the approval of any such extension.
30.     This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans.  Minor modifications to the approved plans that result in lesser impacts may be allowed subject to staff review and approval.
31.     Any modifications to the pro posed drainage or grading for the resubdivision is subject to the approval of the town engineer.
32.     Additional erosion controls are to be installed as directed by town staff if field conditions necessitate.
33.     All improvements and development must be performed in accordance with the East Windsor Zoning Regulations and applicable Town policies.
34.     By acceptance of this approval and conditions, the applicant, owner and/or 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.
Gowdy moved/Filipone seconded/
        VOTE:   In Favor:       Rodrigue
                        Opposed:        Filipone/Gowdy/Guiliano/Ouellette
                        Abstained:      No one

Reasons for denial:     Commissioner Gowdy indicated he gave his reasons during discussion, he felt the project doesn’t fit into the neighborhood and will have an adverse impact on the neighborhood.  The sewer avoidance issue is an issue and is in place until the Commission changes the regulations, or get a clarification of what will happen to State funding.   Commissioner Gowdy also felt the traffic will have an adverse impact on the neighborhood.  Commissioner Filipone agreed with the statements made by Commissioner Gowdy.  Chairman Guiliano also agreed with the previous statements but felt that the traffic, however it’s developed, will be there.   Commissioner Rodrigue suggested his reasons are as he stated during discussion; the sewer avoidance issue was the only thing he was negative about.  Commissioner Ouellette was concerned with the Sewer Avoidance Area, and also felt the project didn’t fit with the neighborhood.  

NEW BUSINESS:  Plantation Properties, LLC - Site Plan Approval for 8,500 square foot industrial building addition at 47 Planatation Road.   [M-1 Zone; Map 40, Block 49, Lot 7A] (Deadline for decision 11/17/05):

Chairman Guiliano read the description of this Item of Business.   Appearing to discuss this proposal was Dana Steele, P. E., of J. R. Russo & Associates, representing the Applicant; and Dean Rasmussen, the Applicant.

Mr. Steele indicated the Application before the Commission is for the expansion of an existing building  located at 47 Plantation Road.   The plan shows several buildings on the parcel, which is located on the north side of Plantation Road; the largest building in the back is a storage building that was approved several years ago.   The Applicant is back wanting to expand the smaller building on the west side of the parcel.   Plantation Properties, LLC. is the owner; they are leasing it to the tenant.  

Mr. Steele reported the expansion is for an 8,500 square foot addition to a metal building with loading area and overhead doors.  They will also be installing overhead doors on the south side of the building for future development.   The property to the west is an agricultural use; they are proposing screening of 27 arbrovitae, with one canopy tree in the parking area.  The site is served by private well and an on-site sewer disposal system.   Mr. Steele submitted to the Commission a copy of a letter from the North Central Health District (NCHD) indicating they need to demonstrate there is a suitable reserve area and the Health Department agrees the soils are good; there is not likely to be a problem.

Mr. Steele referenced the plans, noting the existing buildng and proposed addition; he noted that it’s not likely that there will be a lot of additional expansion for this site.  He suggested the Applicant believes the proposal will provide adequate screening.  

With regard to Town Planner Whitten’s comments, Mr. Steele suggested the Applicant is agreeable to providing additional landscaping in the front of the site.  Mr. Steele also noted they have addressed the comments made by Town Engineer Norton; they are proposing a subsurface infiltration drainage system for the run off from the roof, etc.  He further noted that Town Engineer Norton has recommended that in grading the driveway for the site they take care that water from the site doesn’t run out into Plantation Road; they are agreeable to that recommendation.  

Mr. Rasmussen suggested this proposal is just an expansion of the woodworking operation which was the owner of the builidng when he purchased it.

Commissioner Gowdy questioned if the two sections would be connected?  Mr. Rasmussen replied affirmatively.   Mr. Steele noted this is a metal building with a metal roof; they are providing overhead doors on the side, and also installing overhead doors on the south side for future development.  There will also be a small office for this industrial type use.   Mr. Rasmussen suggested that 2 overhead doors will be sheeted over for future development; the wood working operation only needs one door.

Mr. Steele noted there will be full cut lighting on the site as requested by Town Planner Whitten.  

Commissioner Gowdy questioned if the Applicant proposes to change the heating system, or to continue to heat with wood?   Mr. Rasmussen suggsted they will continue with the wood heating system, as that’s how they get rid of their scrap material, but they have a back up system as well.   

Commissioner Ouellette questioned why the arbrovitae stop where they do on the plans along the western edge?  He questioned if there was additional screening that wasn’t shown?  Is there any residences there now?   Mr. Rasmussen suggested that area is an open tobacco field.   There is an overgrown chain link fence there now that will be taken down, but they did consider continuing the screening along the back.  Commissioner Ouellette suggested arbrovitae are like spaghetti for deer; he questioned if there are any deer at this location now?  Mr. Rasmussen suggested he hasn’t seen any but this parcel is in the middle of a 400 acre farm.  Commissioner Kehoe suggested spruce is a good choice.   Commissioner Ouellette requested clarification that the property to the north is also agricultural?  Mr. Rasmussen suggested it’s industrial.   Commissioner Filipone questioned that there was nothing there on that parcel?  Mr. Rasmussen replied negatively, noting it’s an old tobacco field.  Mr. Steele suggested it all belongs to the same owner.

Commissioner Filipone questioned if Town Engineer Norton had signed off on everything?   Chairman Guiliano suggested Town Engineer Norton  had only requested the change in the driveway issue.  

Commissioner Ouellette noted there is an existing driveway on Plantation Road; will that be removed?   Mr. Steele replied affirmatively.

Commissionr Gowdy questioned that the well is sufficient?    Mr. Rasmussen replied affirmatively, noting it’s a family operation with not a lot of impact on usage.   He noted there used to 160 employees in that building and now they probably have 15; they are probably under utilizing the water now.  

Commissioner Filipone questioned if they are proposing any signage?  Mr. Rasmussen suggested the signage is pre-existing; there won’t be any changes.  

Commissioner Gowdy questioned because this proposal is new does it meet the 60’ set back?  Mr. Rasmussen suggested they meet that.  

Commissioner Ouellette questioned if the Commission was happy with the arbrovitae as proposed?  Chairman Guiliano suggested he could bring it around the back.   Mr. Rasmussen concurred he will do that; there is an existing fence there now but it’s a mess.   He’ll replace the fence and bring a line of arbrovitae around the back of the site as well.

Commissioner Filipone questioned if the lighting details will be added to the plan?   Mr. Steele replied replied affimatively.  He will add the lighting information regarding the full cut off fixture to the plan, and will extend the arbrovitae as discussed and add that to the plan as well.

MOTION TO APPROVE the application of  Plantation Properties requesting a site plan modification for construction of a 8,500 sq. ft. building and associated parking and improvements at property located at 47 Plantation Road.  M-1 Zone,  Map 40, Block 49 Lot 7A.   This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans (as may be modified by the Conditions)

        Referenced Plans:
·       Cover Sheet –  Sheet 1 of 2 –Site Plan, Plantation Properties, LLC, 47 Plantation Road, East Windsor, CT,  Map 40 Blk 49 Lot 7A, Zone M-1, prepared by  J.R. Russo & Associates, 1 Shoham Road, East Windsor, CT 06088. (860) 623-0569, Fax (860) 623-2485  Scale 1” = 40’, Dated 08-24-05

·       Set Includes:
·       2/2     Details & Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Notes       
·       Plans and elevations fro Strout Woodworking, 47 Plantation Road, by Russell & Dawson, Architecture  & Engineering dated 8/11/05 -

-Conditions which must be met prior to signing of mylars:

1.      A paper copy of the final approved plans (revisions included) shall be submitted to the Town Planner for review and comment prior to the submission of final plans.

2.      All final plans submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for preparation of the plans.  

3.      The conditions of this approval shall be binding upon the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns.  A copy of this approval motion shall be filed in the land records prior to the signing of the final plans.

Conditions which must be met prior to the issuance of any permits:

4.      One set of final mylars, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets shall be submitted for signature of the Commission. Set shall be filed in the Planning and Zoning Department.

5.      A cash (escrow) or passbook bond (made out to the applicant AND the Town of East Windsor) shall be submitted for sedimentation and erosion control maintenance and site restoration during the construction of the project.  Any funds that may be withdrawn by the Town for such maintenance or restoration shall be replaced within five (5) days or this permit shall be rendered null and void. The applicant's engineer shall submit an estimated cost of the E & S controls to the Town Engineer.  The amount of said bond shall be determined by the Town Engineer.

6.      A zoning permit shall be obtained prior to the commencement of any site work

Conditions which must be met prior to certificates of compliance:

7.      Final grading and seeding shall be in place or a bond for the unfinished work submitted.

8.      Final as-built survey showing all structures, pins, driveways and final floor elevations as well as spot grades shall be submitted.

9.      All public health and safety components of the project must be satisfactorily completed prior to occupancy. In cases where all of these components have been completed, the Zoning Official may issue a Certificate of Zoning Compliance provided a suitable bond is retained for any remaining site work.  

General Conditions:

10.     In accordance with Section 13.5.4 of the Zoning Regulations, any approval of a site plan application shall commence the construction of buildings within one year from the date of approval and complete all improvements within five years of the date of approval, otherwise the approval shall become null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission.

11.     This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the filed plans.  Minor modifications to the approved plans that result in lesser impacts may be allowed subject to staff review and approval.

12.     Any modifications to the proposed drainage or grading for the site plan is subject to the approval of the town engineer.

13.     Additional erosion control measures are to be installed as directed by town staff if field conditions necessitate.

14.     By acceptance of this approval and conditions, the applicant, owner and/or 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

15.     All landscaping shall be maintained.

Gowdy moved/Filipone seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:  Unaimous

MOTION: To TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.

Gowdy moved/Filipone seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:  Unanimous

The Commission RECESSED at 8:37 P. M. and RECONVENED at 8:45 P. M.

NEW BUSINESS:  Steven D. Knibloe - Modification of approved Site Plan to allow Community Hall expansion at Park Hill Elderly Housing, owned by East Windsor Housing Authority.  [SDD Zone; Map 25/26, Block 37, Lot 38]. (Deadline for decision 11/17/05):

Chairman Guiliano read the description of this Item of Business.   Appearing to discuss this proposal was Steve Knibloe, Executive Director of the East Windsor Housing Authority, and Steven Bowen, architect, and Matt Schivo, Civil Engineer.   

Mr. Bowen reported the proposal is for a 1,700 square foot addition to the community building at Park Hill.  The addition will be off the back of the existing building, and will provide a new office and small kitchenette for the building.  Mr. Bowen indicated the addition will match the architectural details and finishes of the existing building.  

Mr. Schivo suggested they will be removing some pavement, adding a new yard drain, and will be providing silt fencing to protect a body of water to the rear of the site. They will also be providing the protection of 2 water lines, while removing a set to the north. They will be restriping the parking lot to meet current codes for handicapped parking spaces; current code is 12 and 3.  They will also be adding a 500 gallon propane tank which will be located within an enclosure.

Commissioner Tyler questioned the purpose of the water tank?   Mr. Knibloe suggested the complex contains an old water system which includes 2 wells now which supplies the 22 units within the complex.  

Commissioner Rodrigue questioned where the shed will be relocated?  Mr. Knibloe indicated to an area by the maintenance garage.  

Commissioner Tyler questioned if there is a sprinkler system now?  Mr. Knibloe replied negatively.   Mr. Bown suggested there is none now, but they will be putting in 3 heads to meet code requirements.  Commissioner Tyler cited surprise that sprinklers weren’t required in a building that’s a meeting place for the public.   Mr. Bowen suggested they are keeping the same roof line so sprinklers are not required; the fire alarm system is being upgraded to pull stations at egress and the panel is being relocated.

Commissioner Ouellette questioned what was the elevation of the bitumonous walkway around to the back of the building?   Mr. Schivo suggested it’s pretty flat back there; they will make it at grade.  Mr. Bowen suggested all egress points out of the building will be ADA accessible.   Mr. Knibloe suggested that’s the point of this expansion; the bathrooms are not ADA rated and the current office, you couldn’t get into the laundry with a wheelchair.  The current building is rated for 72 people and there are 110+ in the complex; there are a couple of people currently in nursing homes and Mr. Knibloe didn’t know if they will be returning to the complex.  

Commissioner Ouellette questioned what was to the north of the property behind the water tank?   Mr. Schivo suggested it’s another building and a body of water.  Mr. Knibloe suggested it’s the brook that feeds the reservoir.   Commissioner Gowdy requested clarification that it’s the brook coming out of the reservoir?   Mr. Knibloe replied affirmatively.  

Town Planner Whitten noted they compared this proposal to aerial photos of this site, and the actual background material on the complex is piecemeal and was difficult to find.  She suggested there didn’t appear to be any impervious coverage issues.   Commissioner Filipone questioned if Town Planner Whitten wanted to see that on the plans?  Town Planner Whitten indicated they don’t have all the original plans; the project was built piecemeal.  It would be a huge undertaking to locate the plans; she suggested she didn’t feel they will be in violation of anything.   Mr. Knibloe indicated the project was originally built in 1973.  Commissioner Gowdy questioned that the complex was designed for 72 occupants but you have 110?  Mr. Knibloe indicated thay have 102 tenants but the community was designed for 72.  He suggested if people want to use the community hall during the day they might as well go home.   He indicated they want to bring the community hall up to ADA compliance and to bring it up to code.  It’s used as an emergency site also in case of emergencies; all the residents could access the community hall and live there until the situation is resolved.  

Commissioner Tyler questioned if they have smoke detectors?  Mr. Knibloe replied affirmatively, noting they now will have co detectors as well.  Rand Stanley, Building Inspector for East Windsor, speaking from the audience noted that after 10/1/2005 co detectors will be required.

Chairman Guiliano queried the Commission for comments; did they have any problems voting tonight?

MOTION TO APPROVE the application of special permit and site plan review modification of Steven Knibloe and owner East Windsor Housing Authority for a 1700 sq. ft.  +/- addition to the community/office building at Park Hill Elderly Housing Complex, Park ill, Zoned SDD.  Assessors’ Map 25/26, Block 37 Lot 38.  This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans (as may be modified by the Commission) and the following conditions:

Referenced Plans:

“Site Layout Plan – Additions and Alteration to the Community Building, East Windsor Housing Authority, East Windsor CT prepared by SLAM Collaborative scale 1” = 20’, dated 9/7/

Conditions that must be met prior to signing of mylars:

1.      The applicant shall submit a paper copy of the final approved plans to the Town Planner for review and comment prior to the submission of the final mylar copies for signing by the Commission.
2.      One set of mylar plans shall be submitted to the Commission for signature.  All plans shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for preparation of the plans. (One paper set of the Floor Plans and Elevation shall be submitted for signature.)
3.      The conditions of this approval shall be binding upon the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns. A copy of this approval motion shall be filed in the land records prior to the signing of the final mylars.

Conditions that must be met prior to the issuance of any permits:

4.      The applicant and/or developer shall schedule and attend a pre-construction meeting with the Town Planner and Town staff prior to the issuance of any permits or the start of construction.
5.      Final architectural elevations and floor plans shall be approved by the Town Planner and/or Commission.
6.      One copy of the final site plan shall be filed on the land records.
7.      A Zoning Permit for site work must be applied for and approved prior to the start of construction. Three sets of the final approved plans shall be submitted at this time.
8.      A detailed sediment and erosion control plan for the entire development shall be submitted at the time of application for the site improvement Zoning Permit.  The plan shall include the engineers estimated costs for E&S controls.  The Town Engineer will review the plan and cost estimates and will set the E&S bond amount.
9.      A cash (escrow) or passbook bond shall be submitted for sedimentation and erosion control maintenance and site restoration during the construction of the project.  (Side bond must be in place before any permits will be issued). Any funds that may be withdrawn by the Town for such maintenance or restoration shall be replaced within five (5) days or this permit shall be rendered null and void.
10.     A bond, suitable to the Town, shall be submitted for all site improvements (road & drainage). The applicant's engineer shall submit an estimated cost of the site improvements to the Town Engineer and the final amount of the bond shall be determined by the Town Engineer. (Said bond shall be in place before any permits are issued.)
11.     A landscape bond, suitable to the town, shall be submitted for all street trees,  landscaping and wetlands plantings.  Said bond shall be in place prior to any permits being issued.
12.     Foundation as-built shall be submitted and approved before framing and/or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.   
13.     Additional requirements and procedures may be implemented by the Town Planner.

Conditions that must be met prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy:

14.     Site improvements must be completed up-to and around the individual unit at the time of CO.
15.     Final grading, seeding, landscaping shall be in place or the E&S bond will not be released or   reduced.
16.     Additional bonding may be required by the Planning Department.
17.     All inspection fees must be paid.

Conditions which that be met prior to the issuance of any certificates of compliance:

18.     Iron pins must be in place at all lot corners and angle points.
19.     A paper copy of the final as-built showing all structures, pins, roads, walks, driveways, drainage systems, and final floor elevations as well as grades shall be submitted and approved by the Planner.
20.     A final as-built mylar of the entire project shall be submitted and signed by the Commission.
21.     All public health and safety components of the project must be satisfactorily completed prior to occupancy. In cases where all public health and safety components have been completed, the Zoning Official may issue a Certificate of Zoning Compliance provided a suitable bond is retained for any remaining site work.  

General Conditions:

22.     This special permit/site plan approval shall expire five years from date of approval.  Failure to complete all required improvements within that time shall invalidate the approval. The developer may request an extension of time to complete the improvements from the Commission, in accordance the Connecticut General Statutes. The Commission shall require proper bonding be in place prior to the approval of any such extension.
23.     This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans.  Minor modifications to the approved plans that result in lesser impacts may be allowed subject to staff review and approval.
24.     Any modifications to the proposed drainage or grading for the resubdivision is subject to the approval of the town engineer.
25.     Additional erosion controls are to be installed as directed by town staff if field conditions necessitate.
26.     By acceptance of this approval and conditions, the applicant, owner and/or 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.

Gowdy moved/Rodrigue seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:   Unanimous

BUSINESS MEETING/(1)  Correspondence:

Chairman Guiliano noted First Selectwoman Roberts has requested input from the PZC regarding the potential sewer expansion along North Road in relation to the development of the Mansions on the Scantic.   Town Planner Whitten noted the developer was originally to bring a sewer line in to the location of the development from Broad Brook.  Town Planner Whitten indicated First Selectwoman Roberts is questioning if the Commission feels it’s a good thing for the community?

Bill Loos, speaking from the audience, indicated not to put in 220 apartments there.   

Chairman Guiliano respectfully advised Mr. Loos this section of the meeting was not a Public Hearing, but was for discussion between the Commission only.

Town Planner Whitten questioned if the Commission felt it would allow for upgrades along North Road?   Commissioner Gowdy felt it had enormous development potential; the reason the North Road has difficulty is the wetlands issues.  Commissioner Filipone felt it was a good thing; if we wait for the Town to install sewers it may never get done.  This way it will get done with a little liability for the Town.  Commissioner Gowdy indicated that this discussion was all conditioned on approval of the application; this is not a pre-judgement of the application.  Chairman Guiliano felt he would like to see the area sewered but he would like to see the Town pay for it rather than someone else.   Commissioner Gowdy questioned why; Chairman Guiliano indicated he didn’t want to make a prejudgement on something either.  Commissioner Gowdy felt everyone knew installation of the sewer was contingent on approval of the application, which remains pending.

Commissioner Ouellette suggested the Commission should realize if someone brings the sewer in there are infrastructure issues, and the State doesn’t worry about that.   The development may be good for the  town but they are large traffic generators.   In some issues the develoers are willing to make driveway improvements but sometimes the problems are 3 miles away.  Sometimes what comes in are large commercial developments which are large traffic generators.  

Commissioner Rodrigue indicated it’s a problematic road; people will move closer to where they work.  He cited as an example Day Hill Road in Windsor.  Commissioner Tyler suggested the town will get growth; there is no question.   The town is situated in an ideal place.  It’s a question of how it will grow; we need to guide the growth.  Commissioner Tyler felt it was a great idea.  Commissioner Rodrigue felt Route 140 needs it; Commissioner Tyler suggested Warehouse Point needs it.  

Commissioner Filipone suggested Commissioner Ouellette’s point is well taken; we need to consider other issues, such as utilities.   Town Planner Whitten suggested the wetlands will limit development.  Commissioner Gowdy requested clarification that the Plan of Development (POD) recommended getting sewers down that road?   Town Planner Whitten replied affirmatively.  

Commissioner Gowdy cited the reduced cost to the town.   Commissioner Filipone suggested the Town will pay for it, just not as much because the private developer doesn’t have to pay prevailing wages.  The Town will be paying back a percentage of that.  Commissioner Tyler suggested the Town will not charge them for up to 220 facility connection fees at $5,000 per hook up, and we will be paying over $500,000 over 5 years in lieu of paying taxes.  A private company can build that sewer for 2/3 of the cost to the Town; the $5,000/unit cost is a one tie fee.  Commissioner Rodrigue suggested the Town gets the long term use of the sewer.   Commissioner Tyler felt that over time the Town will get more than the $500,000 it’s paying.  Commissioner Filipone suggested if they only build 50 units the Town is not obligated to pay any more than the connection fees for those units.  Commissioner Tyler suggested the benefit to the Town is to be able to solve the existing problems on the existing structures on Route 140, and open it up for additional development.   There are many existing homes and businesses on Route 140 that are having problems.

Town Planner Whitten gave the Commissioners a draft of the developer’s agreement.

BUSINESS MEETING/(2)  Staff Reports:

With regard to hiring a consultant to assist with the Regulations revisions Town Planner Whitten noted she is scheduled to appear before the Board of Finance (BOF) to request funds for that project.  She noted that based on the applications before the Commission, and the statutory requirements for hearing them, the Commission’s agendas will be heavy for both meetings through January/February 2006.  She suggested the Commission consider adding another meeting each month to work with the consultant.

Commissioner Tyler questioned what the consultant will do to assist the Commission?   Town Planner Whitten advised him the consultant will assist staff with new regulations, and propose different ways to deal with Open Space Regulations, and to help bring the existing Open Space and Subdivision Regulations up to snuff.   The consultant’s viewpoint is an unbiased one.   It would be immensely difficult for staff to do that work and the regular work within the office as well.  Town Planner Whitten advised the Commission she received two quotes, one from Planimetrics who prepared the POD, and one from Don Poland, who did much work on the existing regulations.  The PZC has approved an allocation of $19,000 for a consultant; the BOS approved $18,000.  Town Planner Whitten suggested both proposals are about equal; Don Poland would charge $80/hour while Planimetrics would charge $100/hour.   Commissioner Tyler questioned that Planimetrics was the firm that did the work on the POD?   Town Planner Whitten replied affirmatively, noting they did the preliminary work and developed the POD.   The consensus of the Commission was to work with Planimetrics with regard to this project.

The Commission set the initial meeting date for one of the Mondays in October, noting they would like an earlier starting time - 6:30 P. M.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:    Postponed

SIGNING OF MYLARS/PLANS:

1)      Meadow Farms

ADJOURNMENT:

MOTION: To ADJOURN this meeting at 9:35 P. M.

Gowdy moved/Rodrigue seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:   Unanimous

Respectfully submitted,

____________________________________________________
Peg Hoffman, Planning and Zoning Commission Recording Secretary