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
May 8, 2007 Minutes

Public Hearing #1506
May 8, 2007

***** Draft Document – Subject to Commission Review *****

The Meeting was called to order in the Town Hall Meeting Room, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, CT. at 7:03 P. M. by Chairman Ouellette.


A quorum was established as two Regular Members (Gowdy and Ouellette) and three Alternate Members (Farmer, Matthews and Tyler) were present.  Regular Members Guiliano, Menard, and Saunders were absent.  Chairman 0ullette noted all Alternate Members would sit in on all Items of Business this evening.   Also present was Town Planner Whitten.



1)      Application of Sean Patrick’s Irish Tavern for a Special Use Permit to allow the serving of alcohol on outdoor dining patio at 4 Prospect Hill Road, owned by James Balis.  [B-2 Zone; Map 14, Block 18, Lot 18].

2)      Application of East Windsor Limited Partnership for a 6-lot industrial resubdivision located at 96 Newberry Road.  [M-1 Zone; Map 15, Block 19, Lot 12].

3)      Application of Andrew Shefrin, Warehouse Point Fire Dept., for a temporary liquor permit for annual Fireman’s Carnival, to allow beer garden on July 27 and 28, 2007 from 6:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. [B-1 Zone; Map 1, Block 12, Lot 2].    

CONTINUED HEARING:  Herb Holden Trucking, Inc. – Special Use Permit for excavation in four phases for property located on the west side of Wapping Road, owned by Northern Capital Region Disposal Facility, Inc., [M-1 & A-2 Zones; Map 36, Block 49, Lot 17C]  (Deadline to close hearing extended to 6/5/07):

Chairman Ouellette read the Hearing description.   Appearing to discuss this Application was Attorney Alan Koerner, Jay Russo of J. R. Russo & Associates, and John Cohen of Herb Holden Trucking.  Mr. Holden arrived later and was available in the audience.

Attorney Koerner recalled that at the last meeting the changes proposed by Commissioner Matthews were discussed.   He introduced Mr. Ussery, noting he would explain the revisions.  Requested changes are show enclosed in parenthesis [] in discussion below.

With regard to the proposed change for the grade of slopes [2) Finished slopes should be 5:1 or greater to be consistent with surrounding contours.]  Mr. Ussery noted Commissioner Matthews had requested a revision to 5:1, specifically along the west side along the Nilsson property.   They have agreed to change the slope to the requested 5:1 on the west side.   Also with regard to the resizing of the sedimentation basins to the north and south  [4) Provide 50 year sedimentation basins with 8:1 slopes ] they have increased the size of the basins slightly, and they will now contain all of the water for a 50 year storm event.  Mr. Ussery suggested the basins had originally been designed for a 25 year storm event, which would have also incorporated the entire storm retention, but they have now doubled the size of the basins.  

Mr. Ussery noted the site contains 86+/- acres; they will be working in approximately 40+/- acres.  Mr. Ussery gave a description of the location of the parcel.   They are proposing to use the old entrance to NORCAP, which is just under the one mile distance from the Charbonneau pit.   Mr. Ussery noted they could exit the property from the south and west via an easement through the Markowski property to Plantation Road but they don’t want to use that entrance.  It would require that they rebuild and upgrade an existing farm road, and would put traffic on a road where it doesn’t need to go.  Mr. Ussery felt truck traffic would be going left, which would take them past the existing entrance; there is already an anti-tracking pad established at that access.

Mr. Ussery noted there is an existing gravel operation adjacent to this location; that facility is also operated by Mr. Holden.   They would like to finish that operation, which they feel would be a 6 to 8 month completion time, before they initiate work at the subject site.  The adjacent gravel operation is restricted to 60 loads/day.  

Mr. Ussery referenced information provided under a traffic report prepared by Scott Hesketh, of F. A. Hesketh & Associates.   The average daily trips in this location is 700 – 900 vehicles/day, with the A.M. and P. M. peak traffic being 110 and 80 respectively.  Mr. Hesketh has reported the Level of Service to be A.  The sightlines are in excess of 700’ in either direction; the posted speed is 35 miles/hour.

Mr. Ussery noted the Applicant has appeared before the Wetlands Commission; they were granted a permit for the Application as proposed.  There are wetlands associated with Ketch Brook.   Mr. Ussery noted there is a fairly extensive erosion issue on the site; the area has been temporarily bermed.  Flatter slopes would also help to eliminate erosion.  Mr. Ussery suggested the property would be an agricultural use when the grading plan is completed; the owner would be growing corn.  

Commissioner Tyler questioned how much flat area would be lost by changing the slope grades from 3:1 to 5:1?  Mr. Ussery suggested the changes would cause 60’ on the toe of the land to be lost.   The change in volume would be 110,000 cubic yards or less.
Commissioner Tyler questioned if the area would be more susceptible to erosion by being flat?   Attorney Koerner noted the Applicant has made changes at the request of Commissioner Matthews; Mr. Botticello has been advised he probably won’t be able to farm this area; it’s expected it will be grass.  

Mr. Ussery referred to an aerial print showing the adjacent gravel operation, the capped area of NORCAP, and the location of the railroad; he noted the subject location is at the rear.   They would be taking out the finger of trees; they would be 50’ off the tree line as a buffer to the Nilsson property.   He noted they would be coming in from the edge of the railroad and grading it in at a gentle slope; the overall drainage patterns wouldn’t change.  The depth would be the same as today, although it would have a flatter slope.  Commissioner Tyler questioned that the timing of the drainage would be slower?   Mr. Ussery replied affirmatively.  He noted that with regard to the phasing they would start on the railroad side, then create one sedimentation basin, work on the high point, make the second sedimentation basin, and go out.  Mr. Ussery noted Town Engineer Norton had suggested a 2 phase excavation plan with northerly and southerly phases.  He indicated the Applicant didn’t have a preference; if the Commission wants 4 phases they are fine with also.

Mr. Ussery reported an enhancement of the plan which is not currently in the regulations is the staking of the phase line.   They have incorporated specifications from the Ellington Regulations regarding elevation benchmarks which are easily accessible to everyone which should prevent over-excavation.    

Chairman Ouellette questioned the location of the railroad crossing; is there an easement for its use?   Mr. Ussery indicated the location on the plan, noting that it is a paved crossing.  The Applicant does have an easement for use of the crossing.   He noted that at one time there was considerable activity at that crossing, which was shown on the original rail plan going back to the 1900s.  

Chairman Ouellette questioned if the 1 mile waiver option were not granted what options would the Applicant have?   Mr. Ussery indicated they have an easement going west on Plantation Road.  Chairman Ouellette noted Mr. Ussery had made an assumption that trucks leaving the site would turn left and go down Wapping Road; what was that based on?  Mr. Ussery suggested it was based on discussions with Herb Holden, who has indicated most materials go back towards Rockville.  Chairman Ouellette noted comments had been made by the Traffic Engineer that it was difficult to predict; Mr. Ussery agreed.   Chairman Ouellette questioned if they were not able to use the scale how would loads be measured?   Mr. Ussery indicated they would be calculated by engineers.  Chairman Ouellette suggested use of the scale would benefit the Applicant; Mr. Ussery felt it would benefit both the Applicant and the client as the scale house enables them to weigh the product.  

Chairman Ouellette referenced Town Engineer Norton’s comments as noted under memo dated 5/8/2007.  Mr. Ussery noted comment #2, regarding phasing plans, is still under discussion.   With regard to comment #3 - easement over Nilsson land to Plantation Road - Mr. Ussery noted he has calls pending with Town Engineer Norton.  He felt Town Engineer Norton is assuming they plan to leave the site via Plantation Road, which is not their intention.  Mr. Ussery agreed they would need a significant amount of anti-tracking pad, and should add paving as well.  Mr. Ussery further noted the easement with the Nilssons stipulates it is for agricultural purposes only, while the easement with Mr. Markowski does not include any stipulations.  They would use the Markowski easement if they needed to go out via Plantation Road.

Commissioner Matthews questioned the total anticipated yield, in cubic yards, under this proposal?   Mr. Ussery suggested they have calculated 2.3 million cubic yards under the current proposal.  Commissioner Matthews questioned that the excavation would extend for 10 years?  Mr. Ussery replied affirmatively, noting that figure would be based on the restriction of 60 trucks/day (carrying a 15 cubic yard load) operating for 5 days/week.  

Mr. Ussery then referenced the site map, describing the location of the subject parcel relative to the rail line, Wapping and Plantation Roads, and the 1 mile radius based on the proposed entrance on Wapping Road.  Mr. Ussery suggested that if they used Plantation Road as an exit they would far exceed the 1 mile radius; they would be in excess of 2,000 feet from the nearest house on Wapping Road, 3000 feet distant from the next two closest houses, and 2800 feet from the Kingshire Subdivision on Rye Street .   He felt no one would be able to see, hear, or smell this operation from any adjacent street.

Commissioner Farmer noted they had not made any revisions to the proposed depth of excavation; he questioned if the proposed depth was necessary.  Mr. Ussery reported they have anticipated product yield geared to product need in the industry.  He noted they are 8’ to 9’ distant from the closest groundwater.  Mr. Ussery suggested gravel is a natural resource needed in the construction industry which is getting harder and harder to find.

Commissioner Matthews recalled he felt the original plan shows a 10 year (detention) basin; discussion had occurred regarding how the frequency was defined.   He questioned what changes have been made?   Mr. Ussery suggested the basin was increased and the elevation of the berms have been changed.  Chairman Ouellette questioned how practical it would be to install a fence, especially around the railroad tracks - to keep out the nuisance intruders but yet to be able to maintain the basin and provide access for emergency vehicles?  Mr. Ussery suggested if the intent was to keep people from walking through the area a fence would do that, but it wouldn’t keep out people on ATVs, etc.  He gave as an example people operating ATVs on the Charbonneau property just run through and wave at you.  It isn’t practical; they would knock down the fence.

Town Planner Whitten referenced the installation of vertical and horizontal controls for the various phases; she suggested they would be put at the tope at the beginning of excavation but what would then happen?   Mr. Ussery indicated they would move the elevations towards the floor as they dig down.  With regard to bonding  Mr. Ussery suggested if the bond is set for only one phase then they need to keep within the area that the bond supports.   He suggested the vertical controls have more importance than the horizontal controls.

Town Planner Whitten questioned if the basins would remain after construction?  Mr. Ussery indicated the sedimentation basins would be filled in, graded, and seeded at completion of the project, and then it would continue to slope across the parcel.  

Chairman Ouellette opened discussion to the audience:

Bill Loos, Melrose Road:  felt the current access road should be retained; he cited recent consistent calls to this location, including one Sunday, many involving ATVs.   He didn’t feel another access should be put in.   Chairman Ouellette clarified that the Applicant wouldn’t be putting in another access; Plantation Road would be an option.  

Karen Boutin, Windsorville Road:  suggested the ATVs go in on Windsorville Road and park on Town property.

She questioned how far the entrance was to the Charbonneau pit, then how far to her pit which isn’t that far from the Charbonneau?  Mr. Ussery suggested 4050’+/-, then another 1,800’ to 2,000’ to the Boutin pit.  

Ms. Boutin questioned when the last traffic report was done; the cops have been parked in their driveway on Windsorville Road stopping cars for speeding and not stopping for school busses.  Mr. Ussery replied the traffic report was done in December, 2006 to January, 2007.  Ms. Boutin felt the traffic has increased.   Chairman Ouellette noted the same conditions are in place for the existing operations.   Ms. Boutin suggested the traffic isn’t only for the Charbonneau pit; she felt another traffic report should be done as they aren’t hauling in December and January.  

Attorney Joel Janeda, representing Mrs. Nilsson:  Attorney Janeda noted Mrs. Nilsson has been described as the primary abutter; she has only learned of this application a week ago, partly because she was away and partly because direct notification of abutters is not required.  Mrs. Nilsson has several hundred feet of land abutting this property on the west and the north.   This appears to be an extensive excavation; she has concerns about the impact on her property and Ketch Brook.   Attorney Janeda understood the closing date of this extension is June 5th; he is asking the Commission keep the Hearing open.   Mrs. Nilsson has hired people to look at the plans and the site to give the Commission additional information than that which is received from the Applicant – to better evaluate the Application.  Attorney Janeda suggested perhaps additional conditions could be set if they were considered reasonable.  Attorney Janeda reiterated Mrs. Nilsson is the major abutter; he then summarized the timeline of the Application.

Attorney Koerner requested to address the issue of  depth to groundwater.   He noted someone earlier had suggested a distance of 8’ to 10’ to groundwater; he referenced contour plans submitted in March which indicate a depth of 14’ to 18’ to 20’ between excavation and groundwater.

With regard to Attorney Janeda’s comments, Attorney Koerner suggested he didn’t feel Attorney Janeda’s request to hold the Hearing open was fair to the Applicant when he is just coming in tonight.  Attorney Koerner noted he spoke to Mrs. Nilsson’s grandson who was in attendance at the March, 2007 meeting to clarify that the easement was only for agricultural purposes.  He noted they had their experts appear at an earlier meeting; this is the third meeting.  Attorney Koerner suggested there is no impact to Ketch Brook under this proposal.  Chairman Ouellette questioned the harm in holding the Hearing open?   Attorney Koerner noted he will have to bring his experts (Scott Hesketh regarding traffic, Mark Zessin regarding Ketch Brook) back to testify again; they must be prepared because the Hearing is set to close June 5th.  Town Planner Whitten clarified that another 35 days is available for another extension.  Chairman Ouellette noted two Regular Members who had attended the original meeting are not present this evening.  Chairman Ouellette polled the Commission; the majority of the Commissioners preferred continuing the Hearing.  

Town Planner Whitten returned discussion to the issue of phasing.   Commissioner Tyler felt 4 phases would be ok, as long as the Applicant was able to open the second phase while reseeding the first.   Town Planner Whitten suggested it’s also an issue of bonding, which could be handled after the close of the Hearing.

MOTION: To EXTEND the Public Hearing for the Application of  Herb Holden                Trucking, Inc. for a Special Use Permit for excavation in four phases for property located on the west side of Wapping Road, owned by Northern Capital Region Disposal Facility, Inc., [M-1 & A-2 Zones; Map 36, Block 49, Lot 17C] until the Commission’s regularly            scheduled meeting on May 22, 2007 at 7:00 in the Town Hall Meeting      Room, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, CT.

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


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

The Commission RECESSED at 7:58 P. M. and RECONVENED at 8:06 P. M.

CONTINUED HEARING:  Southern Auto Sales, Inc.  – Special Use Permit/Excavation, to import approximately 10,700 cubic yards with material to construct a landscaped berm, on property located on the south side of Phelps Road.  [A-1 Zone; Map 34, Block 21, Lot 12]  (Deadline to close hearing 5/15/07):

Chairman Ouellette read the description of this Hearing.   Appearing to discuss this Application was Attorney T. Mark Barbieri, Jay Ussery of J. R. Russo & Associates, and available in the audience was Rick Nadeau of Southern Auto Sales, Inc.

Attorney Barbieri reported this is a proposal for a landscape buffer on the south side of Phelps Road east of the Reserve Center.   The Application has been approved by the Inland/Wetlands Commission.   Attorney Barbieri cited what appears to be conflicting language in various sections of Section 12 regarding fill for the site, but they have decided to apply for a Special Use Permit to avoid questions regarding the Application.

Attorney Barbieri suggested there are four reasons to do this improvement:  1) continuity of property appearance – they have done berms everywhere their sites are visible from nearby streets.  It’s sort of a signature of Southern Auto Sales.   The Commission usually asks the Applicant to install the berms on sites where the vehicles are visible.  2)  The berms are a security factor for SAS.  3)  The berms provide safety; good fences make good neighbors.  4)  Beautification of their properties.

Mr. Ussery described the site as being on the south side of Phelps Road, 700’ +/- west of the Reserve Center; there are four single family homes between the Reserve Center and this property.  The subject property is an open field with a couple of dilapidated tobacco sheds and a small pond.  Beyond this property there are several homes and farms on both sides of Phelps Road.  Mr. Ussery described the proposed berm, which will be 6’ – 6 ½’ higher than the center of the road; plantings will include evergreens, deciduous trees, and shrubs.  The berm will be irrigated to promote growth; there will be mulch beds around the trees and plantings.  Mr. Ussery suggested that if the Application is approved they would start construction at the end of May or early June, with planting to occur in late August or early September.   If the timing doesn’t work out they will construct the berm in the Fall and plant next Spring.

Chairman Ouellette questioned how long it would require to bring in the fill using the standard of 60 trucks/day operating 5 days/week?   Under the first calculations Mr. Ussery felt if they started in June it would take them through August, which would be a little shy of the timing they need to plant in September.  On a second review it was determined bringing in the fill should take a matter of a couple of weeks; Mr. Ussery indicated he had been thinking the standard was 60 trucks/week.

Commissioner Tyler questioned how they would irrigate the berm?   Mr. Ussery indicated they would drill a well.   

Commissioner Farmer questioned what the berm was protecting?  Mr. Ussery noted the area to the rear is an inventory area; they can be seen through the trees from Phelps Road.  Commissioner Farmer questioned that the drainage would be changed.  Mr. Ussery clarified they haven’t changed the drainage pattern; he ran through the flow pattern for Commissioner Farmer.   Mr. Ussery noted the Application has been approved by the Inland/Wetlands Commission.   It will be similar to other berms on SAS properties, but there will be much more extensive planting.

Discussion turned to the area of the pond; the berm is not proposed to be extended to that area.  Mr. Ussery noted that area is a wetlands area.  No further plantings were required.

Chairman Ouellette queried the audience for comments; no one requested to speak.

Town Planner Whitten had no comments.  

Chairman Ouellette noted Town Engineer Norton has taken no exception to this proposal, the Inland/Wetlands Commission has approved the Application.  He further noted that staff had made a comment about the length of the construction access being only 50’ in the middle of the site.  Mr. Ussery indicated they would use the gate on the east as well and would put in a construction pad there as well.

MOTION: To CLOSE the Public Hearing on the Application of Southern Auto Sales, Inc.  for a Special Use Permit/Excavation, to import     approximately 10,700 cubic yards with material to construct a landscaped berm, on property located on the south side of Phelps  Road.  [A-1 Zone; Map 34, Block 21, Lot 12]  yards with material to construct a landscaped berm, on property located on the south side of Phelps Road.  [A-1 Zone; Map 34, Block 21, Lot 12] .

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

MOTION TO APPROVE the  Application of owner Southern Auto Sales, Inc. requesting a Special Use Permit or an excavation permit to allow the import of material to create a landscaped berm at  property located on the south side of Phelps Road, approximately 2,400 feet east of Route 5, Assessor Map # 34, Block #21, Lot #12.  A-1 Zone.   This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans and the following conditions:

Referenced Plans:

Cover -Proposed Berm & Landscape, Phelps Road, East Windsor, CT, prepared for Southern Auto Sales, Inc., 161 South Main Street, East Windsor, CT 06088, 860/292-7500,  prepared by J.R. Russo & Associates, 1 Shoham Road, East Windsor, CT 860/623-0569, fax 860/623-2485, dated 1/19/07 – 3/12/07

1 of 6, Grading & Erosion Control Plan, scale 1”=40’, revised through 3/12/07
2 of 6, Grading & Erosion Control Plan, scale 1” = 40’, dated 1/19/07
3 of 6, Landscape Planting Plan, scale 1” = 40’, dated 1/19/07,
4 of 6, Landscape Planting Plan, scale 1” = 40’, dated 1/19/07
5 of 6, Erosion and Sediment control Notes, dated 1/19/07
6 of 6, Details, dated 1/19/07.


Conditions that must be met prior to signing of mylars:

1.              The name and phone number of an individual for 24 hour emergency contact for    erosion control problems must be noted on the plans.  Any changes in the individual responsible for emergency contact must be reported immediately to the       Planning and Zoning Department.

2.              One set of final plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets shall    be submitted for review and approval of Town Planner.

Conditions that must be met prior to issuance of permits:

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.

4.              One set of final mylars shall be filed in the Planning & Zoning Office by the   applicant prior to issuance of any permit, one set shall be filed on the land records in Town Clerks Office.

5.              A  performance bond with amount to be approved by Town Engineer, with surety    acceptable to the Town Attorney shall be provided by the applicant.

6.              A full anti-tracking pad, or similar treatment must be installed in the construction    entrance from Phelps Road. Any erosion and sedimentation control measure must first be approved by the Town Engineer

General Conditions:

7.              A zoning permit shall be obtained prior to the start of any work or new phase.  No      zoning permit shall be issued until a cash or passbook bond for site restoration,       erosion and sedimentation control has been submitted.  Such bond shall be good  for the life of the permit/project.  Any funds that may be withdrawn by the Town for such maintenance shall be replaced within 5 days or this permit shall be rendered null and void.

8.              The final grading shall conform to the proposed final grading as indicated on the       referenced plans; but in no case shall any final slope be steeper than a rise to run ratio of 1:3, also knows as a 33% slope.
9.              No trees, brush or stumps shall be buried on site.

10.             The driveway and roadway in close proximity shall be cleaned regularly to       minimize the dust nuisance created by exiting/entering traffic.
11.             The total number of loaded, or partially loaded, incoming trucks to the site shall      not exceed an average of sixty (60) trucks per day or a maximum of three-hundred (300) trucks in any one week period, counting Monday through Friday.

12.             Activity on the site shall not occur before 7:30 a.m. and shall not be opened or        operated later than 5:00 p.m. on weekdays, Monday through Friday., or holidays  and weekends.

13.             Measures to minimize the dust nuisance from the site shall be provided by the   applicant for review and approval of Town staff.  Additional measures are to be         undertaken if required by staff if field conditions necessitate.

14.             The “Best Management Practices” outlined by the Hartford County Natural         Resource Conservation Service shall be adhered to.

15.             The applicant shall adhere to all conditions of their Inland Wetlands Permit.   

16.             The vegetation (trees) to be removed shall be accomplished in one step and the  topsoil shall be stripped off and stockpiled immediately or a temporary vegetative      cover implemented.

17.             Certified as-builts showing contours of completed and active areas shall be     submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department

18.             There shall be no on-site maintenance of equipment unless it is a clear emergency.      Town staff shall be notified if such emergency exists.

19.             All trucks and equipment shall be parked off-street.

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

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

22.             This project shall be executed and maintained in accordance with the approved   plans and conditions.  Minor modifications to the approved plans which result in lesser impacts may be allowed subject to staff review and approval.

23.     By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining

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

NEW BUSINESS:  Frances Borys – 2-lot subdivision of property located at 260 Scantic Road.  [A-1 Zone; Map 34, Block 22, Lot 37]  (Deadline for decision 5/31/07):

Chairman Ouellette read the description on this Item of Business.  Appearing to discuss this Application was Todd Clark of Aschliman Land Surveyors.  

Mr. Clark described the parcel as containing 13+/- acres and an existing house; they proposed to split the parcel into two lots containing 5 and 8 acres respectively.  A small portion of the parcel will be transferred to a neighbor.  Both lots meet all Subdivision Regulations; they have received approval from the Inland/Wetlands Commission.   Mr. Clark noted they have also received approval from the North Central Health District (NCHD) for a septic system and reserve area.  Silt fencing, as requested by Town Engineer Norton, has now been shown on the plans.

Commissioner Tyler questioned if the NCHD has approved the front area yet?  Mr. Clark replied negatively.  Commissioner Tyler questioned if they would go for another lot in front if approval were received?   Mr. Clark felt that they would

Chairman Ouellette questioned the driveway location?   Mr. Clark indicated the driveway is proposed for 1000’ +/- from Abbe Road, in an area of Scantic Road which is nearly flat.  

Chairman Ouellette noted they are requesting two waivers; Mr. Clark concurred, indicating they were for sidewalks and curbing.  Chairman Ouellette noted they are proposing a Fee-In-Lieu-Of Open Space.   Discussion followed regarding the fee requirement on subdivisions of less than 3 lots.

MOTION TO APPROVE REQUEST FOR WAIVERS: The applicant requests the following waivers:
1.      Section 6.3 (sidewalks) No sidewalks to be provided, as none exist in proximity of the subject parcel.

2.      Section 2.11.1 (curbing) no curbs in the area.

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

MOTION TO APPROVE Application of  owner Frances Borys for a 2 lot subdivision (2 lot total) at property located at 260 Scantic Road (Assessors Map 34, Blk 22, Lot 37) in the A-1 Zone
This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans (as may be modified by the Commission) and the following conditions

Referenced Plans:

Sheet 1 of 3 - “Subdivision Plan Borys Subdivision, prepared for Frances S. Borys, East Windsor Connecticut, scale 1”=20’ dated 8/31/06, last revised 3/1/07, prepared by Aeschliman Land Surveying, PC 1379 Main Street, East Hartford, CT 06108 860/528-4881
        Sheet 2 of 3 – Topographic Plan, scale 1” = 40’
        Sheet 3 of 3 – Area Map, General Notes, &Details

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 mylars.
2.      All mylars submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for preparation of the plans.
3.      The final mylars shall contain the street numbers assigned by the East Windsor Assessor’s Departments and the Map, Block and Lot numbers assigned by the Assessor's Office.
4.      If the $2,000 fee per lot, payable to the Town Treasurer, is not paid prior to the filing of the final mylars, the mylars shall contain a clearly visible notation for each applicable lot stating, “Any sale or transfer of this property within five (5) years of the original (re)subdivision approval to a person not exempt under section 7.10 of East Windsor’s Subdivision Regulations shall result in the liability of payment ($2000) to the Town of Eat Windsor for the total fee as defined in Section 7.6 of East Windsor’s Subdivision Regulations”.
5.      The applicant shall provide two street trees on each lot and have them shown on the final plan.
6.      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 which must be met prior to the issuance of any permits:

7.      The lot shall comply with the requirements of the North Central District Health Department requirements for on-site septic systems and wells.
8.      Two sets of final mylars, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets shall be submitted for signature of the Commission.  One set of signed mylars, shall be filed with the town clerk by the applicant, no later than 90 days after the 15-day appeal period from publication of decision  has elapsed or this approval shall be considered null and void unless an extension is granted by the Commission.  One set, sheets 1-4 of 4 shall be filed in the Planning and Zoning Department.
9.      A detailed sediment and erosion control plan shall be submitted for each lot at the time of application for Zoning Permits.  
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.  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 and the final amount of said bond shall be determined by the Town Engineer. (This bond covers public improvements, not individual lots.)
11.     Any conservation easements shall be located and marked in the field prior to any issuance of permits.

Conditions which must be met prior to certificates of compliance:

12.     Iron pins must be in place at all lot corners and angle points.
13.     Final Health District approval of the drinking water supply and the installation of the septic system must be demonstrated.
14.     The driveway must have a 15' paved apron or a bond for such submitted.
15.     Final grading and seeding shall be in place or a bond for the unfinished work   submitted.
16.     Final as-built survey showing all structures, pins, driveways and final floor elevations as well as spot grades and required landscaping shall be submitted.
17.     All required landscaping shall be in place, or if weather does not permit, a bond for the required plantings shall be submitted
18.     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 Officer may issue a Certificate of
        Zoning Compliance provided a suitable bond is retained for any remaining site   work.  

General Conditions:
19.     This subdivision approval shall expire five years from date of approval.  Failure to complete all required improvements within that time shall invalidate the subdivision. The developer may request an extension of time to complete the subdivision improvements from the Commission. Such extension shall not exceed the time limits as provided for in the Connecticut General Statutes, Section 8-26c, as amended. The Commission shall require proper bonding be in place prior to the approval of any such extension.
20.     A Zoning Permit shall be obtained prior to the commencement of any site work.
21.     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.
22.     Any modifications to the proposed drainage or grading for the resubdivision is subject to the approval of the town engineer.
23.     Additional erosion control measures are to be installed as directed by town staff if field conditions necessitate.
24.     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.
25.     Should the property transfer ownership before all work is completed, or before a certificate of completeness is issued, the new owner must place new bonds in their name, at which time the original bond(s) may be released.

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

NEW BUSINESS:  Donald Bischoff – Site Plan Approval for a 1,000 square foot covered material storage building at 112 Prospect Hill Road (Yankee Gas) owned by Norconn Properties, Inc.  [M-1 Zone; Map 5, Block 17, Lot C-01 & P]  (Deadline for decision 6/28/07):

Town Planner Whitten noted that on review of the Application it has been determined that the structure as proposed is in conflict with the property line; the Applicant is deciding where to go with the Application.  

MOTION:         To TABLE the Application of Donald Bischoff  for  Site Plan                             Approval for a 1,000 square foot covered material storage building at 112 Prospect Hill Road (Yankee Gas) owned by Norconn Properties,  Inc.  [M-1 Zone; Map 5, Block 17, Lot C-01 & P] .

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

NEW BUSINESS:  ZP Group, LLC – Modification of the approved Griffin Hill Subdivision to allow the driveways for 5 and 7 Matthew Lane to be combined to form a common driveway.  [A-1 Zone; Map 42, Block 64, Lots 16-6 and 16-7]  (Deadline for decision 6/28/07):

Chairman Ouellette read the description of this Item of Business.  Appearing to discuss this Application was Ryan McEvoy, of Milone & MacBroom.
Mr. McEvoy reported these lots are located within the Griffin Hill Subdivision which was approved in 2004; at that time a separate driveway was proposed for Lot #6 and Lot #7.  They are proposing to construct a common driveway, 12’ in width, which would reduce the size of the culvert and also reduce the amount of impervious coverage on both lots.  Mr. McEvoy cited they are also seeking to waive Section 6.6.9g of the Subdivision Regulations which requires a 20’ x 20’ paved apron built to Town driveway standards, as there are only two driveways beyond the common driveway and he didn’t feel this proposal would cause any undo traffic.  

Commissioner Gowdy suggested that in 2004 the Commission was deadset against common driveways because of the problems they cause between neighbors.  Commissioner Tyler indicated he is against the 12’ width as there would be no way to get two cars, or a piece of emergency equipment, to pass along that driveway if necessary.   Mr. McEvoy suggested the culvert for the individual driveways would be 20’ long; he felt cars should be able to pass along that.  Commissioner Gowdy questioned the reasoning for this revision now; is it to cut down on expenses?  Mr. McEvoy indicated he couldn’t speak for the Applicant on that issue but there are benefits - reducing the size of the culvert, a 545 square foot reduction in impervious coverage, and a 900 square foot reduction in the impact on the wetlands - associated with this change.  Commissioner Tyler didn’t see those issues as benefits vs. the possibility of two families being trapped in their houses because of the inability of access for emergency vehicles; he cited problems with snow in the Winter, etc.  

Chairman Ouellette agreed with his fellow Commissioners; he noted this proposal could have been on the table in 2004 and the subdivision was approved without this configuration.  Commissioner Farmer agreed, noting he would like to see the reduced impact on the wetlands but not if the driveway is not accessible.  Town Planner Whitten indicated she liked the proposal from an environmental standpoint.   Chairman Ouellette queried Town Planner Whitten why the combined driveway wasn’t proposed in 2004?   Town Planner Whitten recalled she thought she had brought that suggestion up but the Applicant didn’t want to do it.   She questioned if the Commission would be amiable to increasing the width of the common driveway?   Discussion followed regarding various combinations of driveway configurations, including additional strips along the sides of the common driveway, increasing combined width to 30’ narrowing to the width of the culvert and widening out again, and other alternatives.  Mr. McEvoy will return to the Commission with revised plans.     

MOTION: To TABLE the Application of ZP Group, LLC for Modification of the               approved Griffin Hill Subdivision to allow the driveways for 5 and 7 Matthew Lane to be combined to form a common driveway.  [A-1 Zone; Map 42, Block 64, Lots 16-6 and 16-7} until the Commission’s    regularly scheduled meeting on May 22, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in the Town            Hall Meeting Room, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, CT.

Gowdy moved/Matthews seconded/VOTE:  In Favor:    Unanimous
BUSINESS MEETING/(1)  Correspondence:   None.

BUSINESS MEETING/(2)  Staff Reports:

*       Town Planner Whitten reported she has been approached by someone who would      like to occupy the A&B Small Engine Repair building on North Road.  The proposal would be to sell fencing and decking, which would be a retail sales use        similar to previous uses (antique shop, toy store) of the building.  They would also use part of the property for display of fencing styles; they would spray wash and paint the building; the parking would remain gravel.  The proposal wouldn’t      require Site Plan review; only a Zoning Permit would be necessary.  

        Town Planner Whitten noted the building is 10’ from the property line.   There is       also a 50’ right-of-way to use of the property to the rear.  Chairman Ouellette         suggested access to the location is awful; what if he became successful and people parked in the right-of-way?  Town Planner Whitten suggested there is a lot of land to the rear, but a change in parking would require a Site Plan.  

        Chairman Ouellette questioned that there were no sewers at this location?  Town                 Planner Whitten concurred.

        Chairman Ouellette questioned if this proposal would be an intensification of use?      Town Planner Whitten replied negatively.   She noted she has had numerous       requests to put in automotive uses at this location, which would be a total change      of use.

*       During construction Beebe Landscaping put in a large flood light as they were   losing thousand of dollars of equipment.  They would now like to leave that light       up, although they were told earlier it was a temporary situation.   The light is on a pole off the property but is very bright.  The Commission has consistently        required 15’ poles and minimum lighting.  This light is extremely bright.  Beebe        has told Town Planner Whitten the neighbors would like to keep it also. 

        The Commission discussed alternatives, including installation of surveillance cameras as replacement for the extreme lighting.  The Commission requested Town Planner   Whitten to ask Beebe to come in with a Site Plan Modification   Application.

*       Town Planner Whitten advised the Commission she has received the final draft of         the regulation revisions; she needs to make her own review and then send the    document off to the editor.  Discussion followed regarding the timeline for the Public Hearing.   Town Planner Whitten noted the need for a 30 day referral to the Capital Region Council of Governments (CRCOG) prior to setting a Public      Hearing; she hoped the hearing could be scheduled for the end of June or beginning of July.  

APPROVAL OF MINUTES/March 27, 2007. April 10, 2007, and April 24, 2007:

MOTION: To ACCEPT the Minutes of Public Hearing #1504 dated April 10,                   2007 as written, and to ACCEPT the Minutes of Public Hearing #1503              dated March 27, 2007 as written.

VOTE for March 27, 2007 Minutes:
Gowdy moved/Farmer seconded/In Favor:  Unanimous

VOTE for April 10, 2007 Minutes:
Gowdy moved/Farmer seconded/
        VOTE:   In Favor:    Gowdy/Ouellette/Farmer/Matthews
                        Opposed:  No one
                        Abstained:  Tyler

(April 24th Minutes handed out at this meeting, no vote taken)


1)      Emilio Parente (Harken’s Market)
2)      Steve Dearborn


MOTION: To ADJOURN this Meeting at 9:24 p.m.

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

Respectfully submitted,

Peg Hoffman, Recording Secretary, East Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission