 |
These minutes are for informational purposes only. For official minutes, please contact the Town Clerk's Office.
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 14, 2002
CALL TO ORDER
Pamela Katz, Secretary and Acting Chairman, called the Regular Meeting of the Simsbury Planning Commission to order at 7:33pm in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices. The following members were present: Susan Bednarcyk, Ferg Jansen, Carol Cole, David Ryan and John Loomis. Also present was William Voelker, Director of Community Planning and Development.
APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES
Commissioner Katz appointed John Loomis to serve for Ernest Gardow, and Carol Cole to serve for Joan Howard.
PRESENTATION
Review of improvements for extension of Bradley Road.
Mr. David Whitney of David Whitney Consulting Engineers addressed the Commission regarding the proposed extension of Bradley Road. He presented a site plan showing the cul-de-sac at the end of Bradley Road and the planned extension off the cul-de-sac of a private road to service the three lots. The extension would serve as a common driveway and would be paved and 23 feet in width, equal to the width of Bradley Road. It would be approximately 100 feet in length, and would be built to town specifications with respect to the base, etc. Mr. Whitney showed the locations of the two leak-offs, the two catch basins, and the drainage pipe, which would discharge into the bio-filter, then into the wetlands. He mentioned that the Conservation Commission had given its approval for this design. He
also pointed out the letter from Kevin Kowalski, Fire Marshal, and said the design allows for access by emergency vehicles.
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE
Review of improvements for extension of Bradley Road.
Mr. Voelker reminded the Commission members of the Planning Commission resolution adopted February 14, 1989, regarding “paper streets” meeting minimum design standards to allow for ready access by emergency vehicles. He stated that Mr. Kowalski is satisfied with the design presented, and that this will be a private road for which the Town of Simsbury will have no maintenance obligations. The Commissioners asked additional questions regarding access issues and clarified the lots to be serviced by the road. Commissioner Jansen made a motion to approve as presented the improvements for extension of Bradley Road as the proposal meets the requirements of the Fire Marshal, the requirements of the Wetlands Commission, as set forth in their action of 4/16/02, and the standards for “paper streets” adopted by the Planning Commission resolution of 2/14/89. Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
Planning Commission Minutes
May 14, 2002
Page 2
DISCUSSION OF PRE-PLANNING FOR THE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT
Review of Implementation Guide regarding Housing and Open Space and Recreation.
Mr. Voelker opened the discussion by asking the Commissioners to concentrate on the Housing section per an earlier discussion with Chairman Howard. The Commissioners discussed the Implementation Guide (IG) in general and the need to make it more user-friendly in the new Plan, while retaining the important content areas. They reiterated the purpose of reviewing the IG is to observe aspects of the old Plan and what worked, what didn’t work, and what to possibly add or drop in the new Plan. Commissioner Katz read the Housing Goal, and Commissioner Loomis pointed out the importance of the goal since it is the headline for the entire section. He felt it would be very important to give careful consideration as to whether the goal reflects the Commission’s vision with respect to housing, and
then whether the policies and objectives uphold the goal. The Commissioners planned to review the policies and objectives with this in mind, and come back to the goal as applicable.
Policy One and its three objectives were read. The Commissioners discussed whether residential land use should continue to be the primary use, and agreed there are alternatives that may necessitate a change in the language of the policy. Regarding objective B, Commissioner Ryan suggested looking at the Land Use Map to identify areas where zoning is in conflict with use, whether commercial to residential, or the reverse of residential to commercial. Regarding objective C, Commissioner Cole mentioned that the Plan needs to account for affordable housing and this objective ties in with that. Mr. Voelker stated that Simsbury will not meet the 10% affordable housing ratio in the near future; Simsbury is at around 3% now. He also said they touched on objective C in the Simsbury Center Charette and
it may be addressed in the Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) presentation planned for May 15, 2002. Commissioner Loomis felt that only Policy 2 of the 5 Policies seemed to support the opening half of the Housing Goal. He said the rest of the Policies mainly spoke to the second half of the goal.
Policy 2 and its five objectives were read. It was suggested that objective A might go elsewhere in the Plan since it does not relate directly to housing. Commissioner Katz mentioned the need to eliminate statements that are so broad as to be relatively meaningless, citing objective C as an example. She pointed out that objective D is more useful since it mentions specific areas, etc. Mr. Voelker stated that for objective E, one way to accomplish this is to use incentive-based zoning like density bonuses, etc. Policy 3 and its four objectives were read. Mr. Voelker felt this policy implied higher densities, with multi-family as an option. Commissioner Katz suggested changing the language of the policy to “creative and diverse”, to relay the idea of cluster housing and
higher density, but with vision. Commissioner Cole questioned the definition of “affordable” housing in Simsbury, and Mr. Voelker said he would get that figure for the members. Regarding objective D, Mr. Voelker questioned how the percentage (20%) was arrived at here, and also said he would get the actual percentage figure for the members. Commissioner Katz suggested they might want to revisit this, pointing out that it would be better not to use words like “limit” which carry negative connotations. Mr. Voelker reminded the Commissioners to think about the jobs-housing tie and the need to accommodate the labor force. He said that to the extent the members feel it is their responsibility to create housing and in what way it should be created should be reflected in the Plan of Development. Commissioner Loomis questioned the sewer system extension and related capacity numbers, and Mr. Voelker suggested having someone speak to
the
Planning Commission Minutes
May 14, 2002
Page 3
Commission on the sewer expansion since this issue is critical and the members should have a clear picture of that in mind when examining the Plan. He stressed the usefulness of the Simsbury cut sheet from the Statewide Plan of Conservation and Development as a reference tool in this process.
Policy 4 and its one objective were read. Mr. Voelker said that not much had been done on this specific topic. He said that in objective A2, they need to look at why this is different from zone to zone, and felt that it would be possible to eliminate minimum floor area requirements altogether. Commissioner Katz pointed out that objective A3 might be eliminated since the Zoning Commission was currently working on an amendment addressing accessory apartments. Mr. Voelker cautioned that the Commission might not necessarily eliminate something that has been accomplished if it relates to the larger goals. He pointed out that objective A4 has very limited uses as presented in the IG. He said the Zoning Commission anticipates doing a major overhaul to the regulations, stating these major
revisions need to be done in order to make them more efficient.
Policy 5 and its one objective were read and briefly discussed. Commissioner Katz stated that this section just lists all the possibilities with respect to residential densities but does not say which ones the Commission is encouraging. She questioned whether Policy 5 says anything not already stated in the preceding policies/objectives. She brought the discussion back to the goal and felt that the goal should be more of a narrative to give the Commission’s vision. Commissioner Cole asked Mr. Voelker to bring additional copies of the IG to future meetings for use by audience members to follow the discussion. She then pointed out the disparity between stating in the Plan that they want affordable housing and actually achieving it, and questioned what is the best way to achieve it.
Mr. John Romano, Board of Selectman liaison to the Planning Commission, stated that he is often questioned on affordable housing, usually by seniors, and they are often discouraged by the figure he mentions as being considered “affordable”.
The members concluded by discussing the schedule for updating the Plan, and when and how to keep the public and other Boards and Commissions informed on this. Commissioner Bednarcyk mentioned that she had found the correspondence sent when doing the last update to the Plan, and the Commission had sent a preliminary letter making initial contact and then a more detailed letter giving the specific schedule for when certain areas of the Plan were going to be addressed. Mr. Voelker said he would discuss this with Chairman Howard. Commissioner Jansen stated that he felt that many people were interested in the Plan of Development, but needed the schedule in order to attend the appropriate Commission meetings. He also suggested using SCTV to get the meetings out to a broader audience, but said SCTV would
need the schedule for this.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mr. Voelker reminded the members about the upcoming presentation on Traditional Neighborhood Design scheduled for May 15th at 5pm at the Town offices. He said they are expecting about 35 people and encouraged the Commissioners to attend if possible.
STAFF REPORTS
None
Planning Commission Minutes
May 14, 2002
Page 4
CORRESPONDENCE
Mr. Voelker noted several items of correspondence. He mentioned the item on moratoriums, stating that they are acceptable if they are for a specific purpose, with a time limit given, etc. He pointed out the letter to the First Selectman from Mr. William Stark, Bureau of Engineering and Highway Operations, regarding the Rt. 185 bridge color. He also reminded the members that the draft of section 10, Economic Development, of the CRCOG Regional Plan of Development 2002 had been put in the packets for their review. Commissioner Katz noted that the CRCOG meeting scheduled for May 16, 2002 had been cancelled.
NEW APPLICATION(S)
None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES for April 23, 2002
Two corrections to the minutes were noted. On page one, section III, paragraph one, line eight, the line beginning, “Regarding the fill,” should read “Regarding limiting the fill,…” On page four, section X, paragraph two, line two, where it mentions the sub-committee, the members of the sub-committee, Commissioner Loomis and Commissioner Katz, should be identified by name. Commissioner Cole moved to approve the minutes of April 23, 2002, as corrected. Commissioner Bednarcyk seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Ryan moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:35pm. Commissioner Cole seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
____________________________
Pamela Katz, Secretary
| |
