Board Members Present: Robert Hiscox, Gil Graveline (arrived at 7:24 p.m.), Al Havican, & Tom Galvin Alternates Present: Jack Crumb Others present: Bill Donovan, Land Use Inspector Members Absent: Don Pomeroy, Anthony Parrella (alt.) & Al Delelle (alt.)
Chairman Robert Hiscox called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. The meeting was taped.
The Chairman seated J. Crumb for D. Pomeroy.
The Commission received a previous notice to hold an Executive Session at 6:30 p.m. Due to lack of a quorum the meeting could not be held as scheduled. Motion by J. Crumb, seconded by A. Havican to add Executive Session to the agenda for the regular scheduled meeting. Unanimous. Motion by A. Havican, seconded by T. Galvin to go into executive session at 7:05 p.m. to discuss pending litigation. B. Donovan, Land Use Inspector and Atty. Jennifer Yoxall from Carmody & Torrance were invited. Unanimous. No votes or motions were taken during executive session. Motion by T. Galvin, seconded by A. Havican to come out of Executive Session at 7:24 p.m. Unanimous.
Public Participation: none
Public Hearing:
a.) 7:30 p.mGina Flammia & Mary France, 138 Waterbury Rd. Application for a Zone Change from Residential (RA1) to Business District (B) Chairman Hiscox read entire “Notice of Public Hearing” as it appeared in the RepublicanAmerican on January 6th and January 13th, 2006. The applicant submitted proof of notification to abutting property owners. The Chairman stated that this proposed zone change is in compliance with the Plan of Conservation and Development. Mary France mentioned the newspaper article regarding where their potential business might go on the property. She wanted to clarify to the Commission and public that the business would not be going in the barn; it would be in an extension of the house. The Chairman stated that tonight’s public hearing is for the zone change only. Chairman Hiscox asked for comments from the public. John Perugini, Buckley Lane, read the article in last week’s paper. He objects to B. Donovan giving interviews to the newspaper about this application. Property at that corner is a very busy corner. There was also a major accident there and drugs were sold out of this house in the past. Mr. Perugini stated that this road is a speedway and he disagrees with B. Donovan. The Chairman stated that B. Donovan works for the Prospect Planning & Zoning Commission. He does not work for the Town of Prospect. B. Donovan, on the P&Z Commissions behalf, routinely answers questions from newspaper reporters. Mr.Perugini stated that he feels that the zone change hurts the homeowners. The burden falls on the homeowner. There’s no parking and he feels that it is a road hazard. Greg Ploski, Clark Hill Rd. owns both residential properties and industrial properties in town. He feels that this zone change is a fair request. Joan Altman of 10 Maria Hotchkiss Road feels that this is a residential area and she doesn’t know how people can come and go in that driveway safely. She doesn’t want to see it changed from Residential to Business. T. Galvin asked the applicant if the property on the south side of Maria Hotchkiss Road is included in this proposed zone change. The applicant stated that they are separate parcels with separate addresses and 138 Waterbury Road is the only property they are proposing for the zone change. Motion by A. Havican seconded by T. Galvin to close the public hearing for a zone change proposed by Gina Flammia & Mary France at 138 Waterbury Road, from Residential (RA1) to Business District (B). Unanimous. Motion by T. Galvin, seconded by G. Graveline to approve the zone change proposed by Gina Flammia & Mary France, at 138 Waterbury Rd. from Residential (RA1) to Business District (B) and set the Effective date for February 14, 2006. Unanimous. J. Crumb asked if the traffic becomes a problem could the applicant change the entrance way. The Commission can suggest that the road cut to the parking comes off of Route 69 instead of Maria Hotchkiss Road when a site plan is presented. The Chairman mentioned that this is the only residential lot from Maria Hotchkiss Road to Waterbury. This zone change is in accordance with the Plan of Development. The Commission informed the applicants that they should meet with B. Donovan to discuss what they need on the site plan.
Correspondence:
1.) Council of Governments Central Naugatuck Valley: Minutes of the Regional Planning Commission for November 1, 2005 meeting. A. Havican, G. Graveline.
Motion by G. Graveline, seconded by T. Galvin to accept the correspondence. Unanimous.
Approval of Minutes: Motion by T. Galvin, seconded by G. Graveline to approve the minutes of the January 4, 2006 meeting. Unanimous.
New Business: a.) Ken Faroni, O&G, 147 Spring Road. Bi-annual update on Quarry activities. Ken Faroni is before the Commission for a mandatory review to give a summary of the past years activities. There are several issues he wants to address: Condition number 14 on the Resolution of Approval; the security system in place which is activated when the quarry is not in operation and on the weekends has detected ATV’s & dirt bikes trespassing on the property. Last year O&G donated two bikes to the trooper’s office to help address the issue on trespassing not only for the quarry but also for town wide use as needed. In talking with Nelson Abarzua, the resident state trooper stated that once they received the bike they practiced in the months of May and June at the quarry. From that time and beyond there had not been any trespassing activities. Another item the Commission wanted to address was the issue with the pre-drilling of the blasting holes and then detonating explosives in these holes the following season. Mr. Faroni submitted a letter stating that there are no explosives stored on the premises. May 31st was the first blast of the season; the holes were drilled during the same month, not the previous year. Starting this year there are no pre-drilled holes. In the permit itself, originally suggested by Clarence Schiller, O&G was asked to keep a seismograph on the quarry floor; Mr. Faroni asked the Commission to take that out of the permit and they will have the seismograph on hand just in case. The production blasting that took place this past calendar year, 2005, were done at the eastern end of the property at a very high elevation. O&G received several calls from Mr. & Mrs. Strumpf, the closest neighbors, in regards to explosions and production shots. O&G reduced the number of holes drilled. The wetlands are further east of where they were blasting. K. Faroni presented the Commission with a comprehensive reclamation plan which includes both graphics and a narrative. He submitted a picture of the vertical rock wall, in the quarry, for the record. The Commission reviewed the plan. They have been working in a northeasterly direction on this property. O&G wants to create diversity in landscape form. One of the plans submitted showed new landscaping. G. Graveline asked where the material will come from. Mr. Faroni stated that none of the material leaves the premises; the material comes from the site. The idea is to create a very level area to be used either for development purposes or residential purposes later in the future. G. Graveline asked about the area towards Naugatuck. K. Faroni stated they are finished with that area and there is mostly vegetation there now. O&G has had considerable experience with this type of reclamation. Mr. Faroni showed the Commission a picture of their Southbury quarry going through the reclamation process; which was a previously mined area. A. Havican likes the method of notification about the blasts by e-mail. Mr. Faroni stated that the neighbors are notified in advance and they offer to place a seismograph on their property if requested. B. Donovan asked about the quarry committee. Mr. Faroni stated that the quarry committee started years ago, in response to complaints O&G received over time dealing with security issues. The people who are most directly or indirectly involved could voice their opinions. A committee was established and Mr. Strumpf was the main person behind that committee. The committee has not met in recent times. The committee will continue to try and meet as frequently as possible. Mr. Strumpf stated that this committee is referenced in the conditions of approval. Chairman Hiscox stated O&G has responded positively to everything the Commission has asked them to do. G. Graveline asked about a fence that is supposed to be in place on the eastern side. Mr. Faroni stated that the fence is in place and the fence will continue to be extended as the blasting progresses.
b.) Andy Adames, 126 Waterbury Rd. Application for Site Plan approval for a proposed restaurant. Tammy Adames, the applicant’s wife and partner presented the application to the Commission. Motion by A. Havican, seconded by T. Galvin to accept the application and set a public hearing for February 1, 2006 at 7:05 p.m. Unanimous. R. Hiscox stated that he feels the applicant has addressed on the site plan questions or concerns that were discussed at the preliminary site plan review. B. Donovan stated that the Waterbury Bureau of Water will be notified. R. Hiscox asked whether or not the Commission needs to see the inside layout of the restaurant, the floor plan. Mrs. Adames stated that she will bring the floor plan to the public hearing.
c.) P&Z Budget review for 2006. The Commission reviewed last years adopted budget. The Commission proposed reducing the Engineering fees from $7,000.00 to $6,000.00 and the Review Plan, Dev. & P&Z Regs. from $3,000.00 to $1,000.00. The Commission reduced the total budget by $3,000.00, which is a reduction of about 18%. Motion by T. Galvin, seconded by G. Graveline to approve the budget as proposed. Unanimous.
d.) Motion by G. Graveline, seconded by T. Galvin to add Joe Commendatore on the agenda for a Change of use at 73 Waterbury Road from an embroidering business to a mortgage company. Unanimous. B. Donovan stated that the traffic impact would be a minimum. The Commission feels that this new business use would improve the traffic, there will be less business going in there because the employees will mostly be on the road. Motion by A. Havican, seconded by T. Galvin to accept and approve the application for a Change of use at 73 Waterbury Road from an embroidering business to a mortgage company. Unanimous. The applicant stated that the mortgage company is only utilizing 1200 square feet of the building.
Land Use Inspector’s Report: B. Donovan presented the Commission with 2 bond reduction requests. The first is for Fulling Mill Ridge Subdivision. They are asking for a release of the remaining bond at this time. R. Hiscox asked if the driveways at this subdivision comply with the regulations. B. Donovan stated that they do comply. Motion by T. Galvin, seconded by G. Graveline to release the remaining $16,000.00 bond for Fulling Mill Ridge Subdivision. Unanimous. The second requested bond reduction is for Southridge Estates, Phase II. They are asking for a reduction of $32,500.00 leaving a balance of $16,000.00 which is the one year retainer bond until the final coat of paving is on the road. B. Donovan feels that the improvements, other than the final paving itself have been completed. G. Graveline asked about the waterline and any other cuts in the road and about the retaining wall. B. Donovan stated the wall was constructed. The Chairman feels that there should be a fence on the top of the retaining wall. The Commission wants to delay taking action until a later meeting to give them a chance to look at the subdivision. B. Donovan stated that Mclean on 59 Plank Road was issued a citation. Deborah Yarrow, 75 Scott Road regarding the large canvas structure on her property faxed a copy of the zoning permit that was given to her for the pre-existing structure. The Commission will have to accept the permit as a non-conforming pre-existing structure. 30 Holley Lane was sent a letter regarding a canvas hut. B. Donovan stated that he did not see the large commercial vehicles on 463 Matthew Street. The Chairman stated that they haven’t been therefor a while. 12 Summit Road will be sent a letter for their canvas hut. B. Donovan mentioned vendors and produce sale on private property. The Chairman stated that the Commission was to meet with the Town Council to make sure the Commission understood what the solicitation ordinance entails. There is a difference between vendors and temporary solicitation. The Commission should initiate meeting with the Town Council regarding this issue and also the noise ordinance. Vending is a prohibited use according to the regulations. In the future theCommission should have a discussion with the mayor or the Town Council regarding this issue and clarify the zoning regulations in regard to this. B. Donovan stated that he is meeting to review current changes with the Toll Brothers project. Land Tech Consultants will also be there. R. Hiscox mentioned the archeological sites and any natural geologic features on that land, specifically large glacial boulders. Hewants to know if any consideration has been given to any or other natural sites that are on 120 Scott Road. Chairman Hiscox also mentioned the old dam in the waterway. If it’s appropriate to save them they should make the effort to incorporate the unique little pieces of the site into their \ plans.
Motion by A. Havican, seconded by G. Graveline to accept the Land Use Inspector’s report. Unanimous.
Public Participation:
Greg Ploski, Clark Hill Rd, referred to Article 4 - Section 4 which indicates 4 foot wide side walks be installed in an elderly housing project.
The project only shows side walks on one side of the road. Mr. Ploski also asked about the 5% of the handicap units. The Commission stated that this issue was discussed at the public hearing. Mr. Ploski stated that he must have missed that. He also asked about Section 4.1.4 in regards to 3 bedroom units. The Commission stated that this Section was amended from 10% to 50% of the total units. Mr. Ploski also asked about Section 4.1.8.6, all facilities should be one-story ground level, with a maximum floor height of 24” above ground. Mr. Ploski stated that he would just like a clarification on what “facility” is. The Commission had a discussion on this and it was researched and it was the consensus of the Commission that the facilities are defined as kitchen and bathroom. Mr. Ploski asked about the requirements for the size of the Community Building, Section 4.1.8.1. In the regulations it states 25 square feet for every unit. He also asked if the remaining of this property can be subdivided in the future. He feels that when the density was calculated the wetlands should not have been included; only the buildable area. B. Donovan stated the project is built more towards the northerly end of the property. There are extensive wetlands on the southern part of the property. B. Donovan stated that all parcels can get a free cut but for what purpose? They would still have to have the minimum land to comply with the 8 units per acre. Christopher Buchholz, 4 Morris Rd. feels there are a lot of issues with the Toll Brothers project and was wondering if the Commission read the article in the newspaper from Selim Noujaim, from Waterbury, the State Representative. In the article Pond Place and Toll Brothers were both discussed regarding connecting into Waterbury sewers. Mr. Buchholz feels that the Commission and town should take into consideration the surrounding towns’ opinions. G. Graveline stated that the new sewer plant in Waterbury is operating below 30% of its capacity. Mr. Buchholz also asked who addresses the issues having to do with how properties are taxed. R. Hiscox stated that the Commission sometimes discusses other issues having to do with properties that don’t have to do with specifically zoning. The Commission has a responsibility to assure that the Zoning Regulations are placed appropriately. Mr. Buchholz also asked to see the log on his property. The Chairman stated that if the Commission observes a violation they may make note on when they see the violations, documentation. The Commission does not drive around town maintaining logs on people. Mr. Buchholz also mentioned the budget. He feels that more money in the budget should go towards zoning enforcement. He also asked Chairman Hiscox what his vision of Prospect is in 10 years. Chairman Hiscox feels that Prospect will be a Suburban town, growing a lot faster and more rapidly than he would like to see it grow, as a resident in town. He stated that any good planner would like to have a balance between residential, commercial, and industrial properties in town. The school system is not adequate enough to handle where the town might be in 10 or 15 years. He feels that there will be a great deal of change and that it is coming too fast. Mr. Buchholz asked about archeological sites that the Chairman mentioned trying to preserve. The Chairman stated that he has an appreciation of nature and if there’s an opportunity to preserve pieces of the past he feels that it should be, if possible. J. Perugini asked about paperwork between Waterbury as far as connecting to the sewers. The Commission stated that issue goes before the Water Pollution Control Authority that issue is outside of the P&Z
Commission.
Motion by G. Graveline, seconded by J. Crumb to adjourn the meeting at 9:55 p.m. Unanimous.
Robert Hiscox, Chairman