Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

start the meeting with the reading of the Pledge of Allegiance. Is that the reading? With the Pledge of Allegiance.

The Pledge of Allegiance is a flag of the United States of America, due to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Great. So first we need to see Harold for some way to

Todd, or Todd. So Harold will be seated. So the first item on our agenda is the 15 Short Hills Road and Flat Rock Hill Road to Twin Pond Development. Just a free split. And Ashley and I am going to recuse myself on this one.

So I'll take over for you for the application problem. Yeah, just, is anybody here?

Good evening. For the record, my name is Harry Heller. I'm an attorney with an office at 736 Route 32 in Uctisville. With me this evening is Peter Carley, principal of Flint Time Development, as well as Mark Reynolds, the professional engineer and land surveyor. The parcel is about a 32-acre parcel. It is located adjacent to I-95, has frontage on both Flat Hill Rock Road as well as Short Hills Road. We have conducted a title search on the property. I have submitted a report to your zoning officer indicating that based upon our research, there has been no division of this property that would constitute a free split since the date of adoption of subdivision regulations in old lines. So this is an application for free split on the free split procedure. We're proposing to divide the property into two lots and this is just kind of an area plan to give you an idea of where we're at. Parcel A is a 4.91 acre parcel and the remaining land is a 27 acre plus or minus parcel.

You can see in green we have wetlands on both properties.

We have submitted an application through your Municipal Wetlands Commission for a permit to conduct upland review area regulated activities in conjunction with parcel A that has been approved by your Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission. We have demonstrated zoning compliance on each of the lots, both with respect to all of the bulk requirements in the zoning regulations, as well as meeting health code. We're showing a location for code compliance septic system on each lot. And I'm going to submit into the record because the Ledge Light Help Desk Report references a July 1 plan. So I'll submit that into the record. The only difference between the July 1 plan and this plan is Ledge Light asked us to show a conforming well location on each of the lots. So based upon the permeability of the soils in this area. There's a protective radius of 75 feet around the well, and we've demonstrated on each lot that that can be accommodated. So we have a letter in the record from Ledge Light Health District indicating that soil conditions are suitable for the development of an on-site septic system on each of the lots, and the site plan demonstrates that we meet all of the requirements of the zoning regulations. We'll ask you to approve the free split. If there are any questions, I'll be glad to address them.

Yeah, I have a question. The ledge light document talked about a high water table in that area of three feet below grade.

Correct. So whenever you have ledge less than 60 inches or groundwater higher than 48 inches, the soils are still suitable for a code-compliant septic system. but it requires that the septic system be designed by a professional engineer.

It becomes an engineered system. Correct. You build a mound and that's where the leach fills with it.

Yeah, there's a separating distance that you have to keep the bottom of the leaching trenches above the high ground work. So you end up building the system partially in fill.

Is there room enough for a secondary leaching area?

Yes. You've got the test pits they did not pull in fault kits and a PERC test on each of the lots. So that area demonstrates that you have sufficient room to put in both primary and research.

No, thank you. Any other questions?

We did also send out the letter we received from Attorney Casilla in the meeting. He has no issues with this either. So you are more or less free to act on it and see if they should give a second.

Thank you. Would we have a motion to approve the loss?

I'd like to make a motion that we approve the free split. Second.

Okay. All those in favor? Aye.

All of us. One abstention.

And one abstention. Well, one. You accused himself. Sorry.

Thank you.

Must have been out on the slot already.

Sort of remember it. You forgot to ask for a discussion. Yeah, well, I asked about questions, right? No questions, no discussion. Yeah.

The next one is actually sort of an administrative matter more than anything else. I will work with Robin dictating exactly what he said. This is a subdivision that you guys approved in 2016. Harold was here for that. In any event, it has Harold's signature right here on it. The problem was it was never recorded. You guys gave an extension to record it. but it never actually made it into the land weapons. And by statute, if you don't record these maps within a certain amount of time, they become void. So what I am doing tonight is bringing this back to the Commission. The statute says the Commission should basically take action to void the subdivision, and then we will write on here that the subdivision is void, and we will record the voided subdivision map on the land rights. So that's what we're, again, sort of here to do tonight. I'm happy to take questions about it. It looks like what happened was at some point the property owner, because came in this morning, was sort of still complaining about the fees, stopped paying Angus McDonald. McDonald never sort of took the final action recording the Mylar. And so here we are at this point. This is now essentially getting wiped away. We sent her away with a new subdivision application today. So I expect she'll be back in to reapply and seek new approval for the subdivision. But this one has to get voided out and start from scratch. So I just need a sort of vote from the Commission to confirm that the subdivision has been voided, and then I will work with Rob on putting the appropriate language on here and getting it recorded.

I'm just curious, if it never got recorded, why do we have to then record it?

Okay, because the real reason is, if you look on our GIS, this is shown as a subdivision. So I want to put something affirmatively on the land records that says that this cannot be treated as a subdivision. I've already been in touch with the assessor who is going to merge the lots back for her standpoint. But I want to take the affirmative step of saying that even though it's on my GIS as two lots, even though it's been taxed as two lots, that it never should have been treated as two lots. So I'm going to record this as a voided subdivision just to clear up the fact that this should not be treated as a valid subdivision lot. It never got built on. It's still a vacant lot, by the way.

Yes.

How many lots are there, Eric? They went from one to two. So it was a split. Yeah, but it was a subdivision. It was an actual subdivision of approval at the time to go from, because it had previously been divided out. But again, it never got recorded, so it never became a valid subdivision. Got it. Okay, so that's where we are with it. Are there other questions that anyone has with this? Okay, then I'm going to need a motion to void the subdivision.

I make a motion to void the subdivision as recommended. Second. Any other discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed?

All right. Again, I will wrap out something for someone with better handwriting than mine to write on here and have you assign data underneath the property. Yes. You probably don't want me using my handwriting. It's okay. Maybe Julie or somebody else would better handwriting, but I will read it out, and then we will make sure that, again, it gets on here, and you come in and sign at the appropriate time.

Okay? So that's that. Craig Rourke. Am I alone?

We're going right along.

We're going right along. This is a modified out of less than one modifications. I should have paid your bill and filed damn thing. She's been paying probably more tax.

She put in so much money already. Why don't you?

She still owns the engine. This is the driveway. Okay.

Is anyone here for 4-2?

What are you coming forward with? I'm 6-1, she's 4-2. Yeah, okay. Congratulations. What are you trying to do here? Hi, I'm building a garage on the property and we need to do... Give your names for the record. Jesse Vassiloff. And I'm Marsha Vassiloff-Abrahams, his mom. And I'm building a garage and we need some more space to the boundary line through the 36 feet, I think. So we're doing a line lot modification there.

A lot of modifications. It's not that much. Again, it was approved or reviewed, and Ed Casella says there's no reason why it cannot be approved by this commission. It's pretty straightforward. Again, there should be a signature on there for Rob to sign, and we're going to need to see just a copy of the transfer deed, and then we should be able to approve it. Any questions from the commission on this?

Is there an existing house on the big lot?

Yes, that's my house. Right? Or is that the forest land? She's on 4-1. I think the big lot is 4-2. So there's no house on 4-1. Right, it's in forest land.

Okay. Any other questions? All right.

someone want to make motions well let's make a motion with it i don't see any reason why it should not be approved at this point i make a motion that we approve the application yeah we have a second second any discussion all those in favor sign and again look you're going to need a deed transfer over that victory there which we need to take a look at as well I'll take a look. Let me just take a look. See what we have in here. What are you looking for? I'm looking to see. He said that they submitted a draft deed as well. So here it is. So the deed and then my law, once my law is signed, let's come back and we'll take the land register report, okay? Okay, great.

Thank you very much.

Don't see anybody here for the last one. We'll talk about that in a second here. Jacket runs best.

Yeah, the best. Keep the core warm.

Thanks. I guess there's no one here to speak on this one, so I'll just will you briefly? As you can see, there's a triangle there that is being moved from one lot to the other lot so that the driveway is properly on the right lot, I guess. Again, not a very large piece of land being transferred. It doesn't seem to have any implications one way or the other as far as setbacks or anything of that sort. Ed Casella indicates he has no issues with it. Ledge Light has no issues with it. So again, there's nobody here for the application. applicants. So I guess if you have any questions, I'll try and answer them.

The owners of 36 sold it to 40, and when they looked at the parcel for 40, they noticed that their driveway was in 36. So the people of 36 agreed to give that little triangle back to them.

That's interesting. On this map, it's that little triangle right there? Yeah. Because these same people own that property too. They do, yeah.

Distinguish each one of us. Okay. Again, not very big, not very important, but they wanted the driveway on their own property, I guess.

So there you go. Makes sense. All right.

I move that we approve the lot line modification of the driveway adjustment, I guess.

Second.

Motion made and seconded. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye.

Any opposed? All right.

Either one of those two, both there, I think so. Okay. And pick somebody, right?

Okay.

All right.

I do have the plan of conservation and development on there, but I don't know if there's anything new to update on that one.

I think there's discussion on that. Okay. You only sent this out of the new zoning. That was the recent zoning approval of what we had discussed last week. It was on the mixed use. Remember them? And we had, in our discussion, we had concern that if you took the commercial properties along Route 156 and you required any development, residential development in there to be mixed use, it'd be very difficult for someone to place retail on the first floor as required by the statute, right? So we had put in a recommendation, all right, that retail not be unnecessary on those properties. And I think the problem came down to the word mixed use, because when you use the word mixed use, you're actually saying you have both residential and commercial. So I guess there's nothing wrong with this going forward and saying, hey, that's mixed use, because it is, it's commercial and residential. The problem is that when you start off with this 7.152, it says middle-use housing is intended to provide compliance with Statute 8.2 as amended by the Public Act 2521, which requires that zoning regulations provide the development of a transit community middle housing development or mixed use development in the commercial zones. So we already accomplished half of that. So for instance, this legislation that got pushed forward here, that got through, just requires that if you were to build any of that commercial property along 156, that's what I'm talking about. It's that area that starts south of where Miami Beach is. It comes all the way across to, say, where the police station is. That whole area and the Soundview area. So this type of use is going to prove for Soundview as well. But if you wanted to put up a residential building, say, in Soundview, this does not approve that. Okay? In a commercial, you know, multi-story building. Okay? This would not approve it. If you wanted to take the area by Cherrystones, which I understand there is an application for someone to do something there. There's no application. No? Okay. That fell apart?

Did it fall apart? No.

It didn't fall apart.

there's many more steps that we'll need to have.

It's not even that it fell apart, it's that it's still- There's still a way in the- There's still interest, but it hasn't developed a plan they haven't filed.

That would not be a possible use, say, if that area by Cherrystones or where the Gulf Range is, if that became residential, it would not be a permitted use in our commercial zones.

That plot happens to be zoned residentially in the back at any event, so- The existing residential zones are not covered by the statute. It's only commercial zones.

I doubt it, but that's what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the commercial areas along Route 156. We've now approved for mixed use. We did not approve for multiple housing. Let me ask you something. Part of the state statute, and part of what we had in our POCD, Okay, here's our POCD. It says, this was part of the economic development for the area from our POCD. That's what we're talking about today. It says, on behalf of the Economic Development Commission, it was asked to provide research to examine the feasibility and the demand of mixed-use retail and residential development for the business district along Hulls Road, the halls road. And then the group also retained a committee to examine a comprehensive plan for halls road that would create mixed use in the village district. Then it goes on to say neighborhood and seasonal commercial use and services should be allowed in commercial locations along route one in the label in the Laneville area, that's by Coffees, and along Shore Road, 156, and the Soundview area. So our POCD, we're starting to look at, but because the economic guys, the Economic Commission, brought it to our attention that we should be starting to look at commercial development, retail, combination retail, commercial development in those areas. Soundview, the area that I was just talking about, Paul's road. Right. So this sounds very similar to the words that are being used in establishing a transit oriented district. Right that the state is using. And I don't know how much discussion has there been about transit oriented districts.

There is not any discussion transit oriented district, we are part of the transit zone, because we do have mass transit in this town, at least according to the state, but we have not attempted to define a transit district yet, because, so again, the submissions.

It hasn't been done, but anyhow, I think a transit-oriented district may well fit into the conservation and development plan of the old line, and I would make a motion that for the next meeting that we have, we present sort of like what, I'd be happy to put it together and work with anybody who wants to join me, the discussion of what a transit-oriented district is, what the state is trying to push us to achieve, also from the region planning area. I think it fits. I think it fits very well in that there is a bus line being created or is in existence. I don't know if it goes from railroad station to railroad station now, but that was the proposal that it would run from the new London station to the old Saybrook station. So that line goes right down Route 156. So here we have a bunch of things starting to happen. We have the beach community is all putting in sewer systems. So that's Old Lime Shores, that's Old Colony, and that's Miami Beach. So that would then create a sewer system along there. Part of the benefits, if you get designated that you have created this transit-oriented district, you can get funding from the state to help you both with schools and with sewer systems. So that might get us over the hump Okay, you know, so that's money could be applied to for, to try to help bring the Soundview District, you know, for them to get sewers. So we got, you know, because we have the beach communities, a whole Soundview without sewers, and then Miami Beach with sewers. You know, but that sewer system is going to run right down that whole, those lots that we're talking about that are commercial. So that's such that if someone did do multiple family housing in there, they would have that sewer system that would allow it to be possible. So yeah, I think we should look at that.

So I might say that Julie sent out the flyer for the zoning, I forget what it's being called. Workshop. Yeah. 29. 29. That's on housing, I think. About housing.

And I might say that.

Next one. Yeah. But housing in particular ties into this. And you may want to make sure you attend that because our POCD, you know, no different than we made recommendations to zoning that we didn't really like that they limited that first floor stuff, but they ignored us. Right. And so us modifying the POCD, you're talking about it right now, isn't going to have a whole lot of effect. But if you go and talk to zoning, they're the ones that are writing this regulation that needs to have these things in it if that's what you think needs to be in it.

I think they should be considered. I don't see, Rob, why wouldn't we do both? Why not try to take the lead on the planning side?

Well, because you say take the lead, but really we're not the ones writing the regulations. Zoning is writing the regulation, and they're revising it and writing it right now, and that's the purpose of that workshop.

Zoning comes to us. Do they not say, is this in compliance with the POCD?

In the end, they do, but now's the time to talk to them, though.

I understand that this first change was really aimed at getting something on the books by July 1, and I would think that good suggestions when they're considering, you know, making comments at the housing workshop, and then when they actually go into getting more information. I think, Eric, haven't they even started meeting with commissions?

Some commissions? Well, we met with commissions in connection with the environmental stuff already.

So maybe we'll do it with our housing.

We've all already let the various commissions, including yours now, we will set up a time so that a designated person from each of these commissions can show up after the community web workshop about two to three weeks later to help filter whatever comes out of that workshop into something that's going to look like regulations. So this body, affordable housing, other people will be invited to help take whatever comes out of the meeting on the 29th and translate it into the possible regulations for the zoning commission.

So what I think what you should do, Mike, and I don't know, do we meet in August? I forget.

Yes, you do. Planning Commission is one of the few that meets in August.

One of the few meets in August. So, you know, write something up, and then you're going to have an opportunity not only to present it at the, well, maybe, you know, it's the 29th of this month for the housing.

And if you speak individually, you certainly can. And it seems likely that you will meet in August prior to the next work, the next gathering with the commission members, designees. So you'll be able to review what came out of that meeting and then come up with your thoughts as to how you want.

We can make that recommendation again. It's not too late to get that recommendation into the regs because this was a quickie to address the state statute. So we'd have something rather than nothing. because otherwise someone could just come in and do something. But now we've got a regulation, at least in some zones, that will, you know, we still have to comply with the state statute and what the state statute says, but it gets a little review. But, you know, I think we could have an effect on, ultimately, if it gets there, I wouldn't give up. I think we should just work on that recommendation and just repeat it enough so that they accept.

And I think, honestly, the zoning commission was receptive to your comments. I just think that they felt sort of a time pressure to get something in place. And they said, look, we want more time and opportunity to review this. This section of the regs is being reviewed again at the July meeting. So they pretty much sort of punted a little bit and said, we haven't abandoned this concept, but let's take it up when we have more time to deal with it. I think the other thing is, honestly, they suspect, and probably rightly so, that the statute is likely to change further so that they didn't want to sort of keep moving against the moving target here a little bit. But I wouldn't view what they did as just blatantly ignoring you. I just felt like, I think the sentiment coming out of the zoning commission was this needs a more dedicated discussion than we have the time for tonight. So I wouldn't do it as a rejection. I think it was more of a pause.

So Mike, I think what you should- I fully understand them going forward, even though we had our apprehensions expressed. And that I think was really in the wording because they were writing a section of zoning to deal with mixed use. Their focus was mixed use. Mixed use by the definition is commercial retail. That isn't what we were talking about. We were saying, and our motion to them was we had a problem with, like we had concerns we thought they should consider for those commercial areas along 156 that whoever wanted to develop that not have the necessity to provide commercial on the first floor because it wasn't going to work. It simply would not work. And so that's why I think if we address like the transit-oriented communities, I think not only would it help into the overall POCD in trying to create more multi-housing, various housing uses and types, it would help with that and it would also possibly provide some funding to get past the sewer problem. who knows about the sewer problem. So it might help with that. If we could get some money to help that, that would be great.

So you write something up and we'll put it on the August meeting. Take a look at it.

Yeah, we'll discuss it.

But attend the 29th meeting.

Certain things up. Send it to everybody prior to the meeting.

You haven't filled out the survey.

At the meeting. Is that okay?

Yes. Just as a reminder, if you haven't filled out the zoning survey, fill it out. They extended it right beyond the end of July, as I understand it.

Yeah, well, I'm not sure all the way to the end of July. Certainly within the next couple of weeks, we do have about 540 responses at the moment. It's slowed down. So the thought is we're only really getting maybe one or two responses a week that's maybe not worth keeping open at this point. We've sort of gotten into where we're going to get in. So one last push here to get people in, and then probably next week or two it's going to be shut down.

You can even add a comment on that. It asks questions about almost everything.

Yeah.

If you haven't done it, do it.

I'll get to that meeting. It's on the 29th. I'll get to it.

We sort of merged the planning conservation development into the ZEL update. I'm not sure if there's other things to talk about the ZEL update there. There is one other thing I do want to mention. You guys may be familiar with the fact that we have the two new affordable housing lots going in on Flat Rock Hill. It looks like as we're sort of going through the final steps here, it never got an 824 referral from the Board of Selectmen to you folks to determine consistency. with the Planet Conservation Development. We're selling interest in land. It needs an 824 referral. That hasn't happened yet. It's going to happen in London. So I am probably going to need to hold some sort of special meeting next week for the quorum of my commission members. We can even do it sort of at the front desk of the, for the tooling there, just to have a discussion about the consistency of these lots being sold with the POCD. And I will write something if it just expresses why we think it's consistent. You guys already acted on the subdivision. It already went to DBA. But again, for whatever reason, somewhere in all of this, the 824 referral got dropped. And we need to get it done before the lots are actually sold.

This was the affordable housing that was being built?

Yeah, the two lots. Yeah, there's two new lots that are technically on Riverville, even though they come out on Flat Rock Hill. You guys approved the subdivision. ZBA approved the fact they're not going to have frontage. There's a whole bunch of things that already happened. But somehow in all of this, the 824 referral to actually sell the land never came to you folks for approval. So, again. Can we do it now? I asked the attorney if we could do it tonight. I said, can we... You probably have to put it on the agenda, right? Well, no, it's not even that, Michael. Because the Board of Selectmen hasn't technically voted to send it to you yet, you can't vote before they send it to you, which is only happening on Monday.

Okay? So... If the Board of Selectmen sends it to us.

I don't doubt that you will vote on it when it comes to you, but technically you're not allowed to vote until it comes to you. So they will vote Monday and then we will set up some sort of special meeting. Are there times that are better or worse for people next week to do this after Monday?

Well, I'm not here.

I understand that, but we can... Or we can do it the week after if you want to do it the week after. But we're trying to get it done quickly because they're trying to get the lot sold.

Just another aspect of this is we're about to get, they've gone out for River Cog packages on the housing plan that each municipality will have to create. So that's going to be another kind of piece. You're going to have to have a housing plan. It's going to take some inventory. I don't know what's in the package yet.

Isn't River Crog supposed to be doing active as far as the inventory of our land resources?

Well, in fact, Affordable Housing already did that inventory. So that inventory is more or less dumped. So I'm not worried about the inventory piece of it. Where is that inventory?

Where is that inventory?

Well, Michael Foliano had it before he left. The Affordable Housing Commission, I think, still has it. I will make sure that I get it from them. But they already spent a great deal of time a year or two ago putting together that infrastructure. So I think we probably have at least the foundations of something to work from unless there's other pieces that need to be added on top of that. But I think it's probably at least 90% completed.

When I was at the steering committee meeting a couple weeks ago, Mike Fagliano said that River Cod really had the lead on that. And so they were supposed to be doing that and establishing the inventory of what land is available, what buildable land is available.

That's true. But again, it was probably going to work from, River Club worked with the Affordable Housing Commission on creating the inventory to begin with. So again, I haven't seen it, but I know it must exist somewhere. I will track it down. But again, at this point, the inventory piece of the puzzle, I think should be relatively easy to deal with. Again, at some point, We will need to decide whether we want to go in with River Cod on creating a housing plan or whether we want to do it ourselves. Fortunately, we don't need to do that until 27. So I don't want to spend a lot of time discussing it tonight because we don't need to deal with it for another year. But we will be getting those packets in. Once we get them in, I will make sure you guys have them.

Okay? Okay. You know, in a steering committee meeting, again, once again, we talked about the fact that You know, there was several steps that had to be done, but we really can't start doing anything as a town until we know what we're dealing with, what resources we have. And so I think that's a very important part of this whole deal.

That's fine.

Great. So that wraps up our ZEO update, I assume?

I have nothing further. I get it. I have zoning Monday night, I have EPA Thursday night, so I'm not sure either Tuesday or Wednesday night next week works for anybody, and now we'll push to the following week. But again, I will be trying to pull together at least three of you to get a discussion about the consistency of the sale of these units with the POCD, and I will draft something up and explain why.

Just prepare for that. Does anyone have any opposition to this proposal? the affordable housing, the two units. So all we need is just three people to come in at any time that's convenient.

The schedule, I'll need to put an agenda. Wednesday, you said I'd probably be available.

You can do it at the bar.

It's not open on Tuesday. I'm going to wait until Thursday.

I need to create an agenda. I have to file the agenda at least 24 hours ahead of time. We need to call the meeting to order, take the vote. There's people working involved. It's not that big a deal. We'll make it happen. I'm just trying to make sure that you guys are aware it needs to happen. We'll make it happen. Yes.

All right. Late week actually is better for me. Whenever we can make it happen. Okay. The last item on the agenda is reading approval of minutes from June 11th. Since you're in place of Todd. Yeah, you're in place of Todd. It's your job.

I make a motion that we Approve the minutes as submitted and waive the reading of the minutes.

Second.

All right. All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Looks good.

All right then. Okay. Motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn.