1986/05/13Berlin Planning Commission minutes of April 22, 1986 continued.
12. Agenda Item 9b. A discussion also took place on a proposed zone
change from R-15 to General Commercial for Lot lA, Block 105. A motion
was made by Mr. Bourgeois, seconded by Mrs. Wilcox and voted unanimously
to recommend denial without prejudice since the new zoning regulations for
the area have not been adopted yet.
13. Agenda Item 10. Mr. Rosso announced that a letter had been received
from Mayor Ward regarding a conference to be held on May 10. He asked for
names of any Commissioners who would be interested in attending.
Mr. Rosso also reminded the Commissioners of a joint meeting to be held
on May 19, 1986 with the Zoning Commission, Planning Commission and Zoning
Board of Appeals to discuss need for a Town Planner.
A motion was made by Mrs. Woznis, seconded by Mr. Bourgeois and voted
unanimously to accept the minutes of the April 8, 1986 meeting.
Mr. Rosso adjourned the meeting at 9:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Philip Bourgeois, Secretary
Sharon Guite, Recording Secretary
Typed April 23, 1986
BERLIN PLANNING COMMISSION
1. The regular meeting of the Berlin Planning Commission was called to
order on May 13, 1986 at 7:35 P.M. by Chairmanj Nunzio Rosso. Those present
were George Southworth; Cindy Wilcox; Betty Mildrum, alternate seated for
Dorothy Woznis; Claire Larson, alternate seated for Phil Bourgeois;
Morgan Seelye, Town Engineer; and Jim Horbal, Assistant Town Engineer.
2. Agenda Item 1. Mrs. Mildrum read the legal notice of the Public
Hearing to consider the following subdivisions:
Lot 8lB and Lot 89, Block 10. Joe Cermola of Cardinal Engineering
described the proposed subdivision after which Mr. Rosso asked for
questions and comments. Mrs. Caron of McMurray Drive asked Mr.
Cermola to outline the newly created retention basin. Joseph
Dubuc of South Slope Drive submitted a petition signed by 61 of
his neighbors on their concern for building in a wetland area. He
also questioned,since the brook running through the area will be
piped, how water will be drained out during high water periods.
Mr. Cermola explained it will be drained back into the water course
but that details of the design have not been worked out yet. Mr.
Dubuc asked how a meeting can be held without details being worked
out first. Mr. Rosso replied that the Public Hearing is an informa-
tional meeting and that engineering details will have to be worked
out later with approval of the Town Engineer. Mrs. Caron asked the
difference between intent and promise. Mr. Cermola reviewed the
procedure by the applicant and expRained that in the early stage,
sketch plans are drawn up showing the intent of the proposal.
Mr. Seelye also explained that the hearing is basically to inform
those interested of the number of building lots proposed, Street
layout and basic drainage. Detailed engineering plans would be
worked out later and the Commission would make recommendations
t~king into consideration comments made at the Public Hearing.
Mr. Seelye also emphasimed that drainage and filling of wetlands
must be subject to approval of the Inland Wetlands Conunission.
Robert Salerno of 55 Glenview Drive asked if neighbors will be able
to speak at the regular con~ission meeting. Mr. Seelye said yes,
they can request t6 speak. Mr. Dubuc requested a copy of the next
agenda. Mr. Salerno then asked what wili be done to Drotect the
stream and its flooding upstream during peak runoff t~mes and also
asked if the pond on the property would remain. Mr. Cermola replied
that plans would be designed to eliminate any increase due to the
new subdivision and that a portion of the pond would be filled and
a portion would remain and be deepened. Mr. Manzariz of 7 Harvest
Hill Ro~d asked if the subdivision could be done without cutting into
South Slope. Mr. Cermola replied that they are tryin~ to eliminate
more deadend Streets. Mr. Manzariz also expressed his concern for
th~ safety of children on the existing streets. He stated thst he
would like to see fewer homes and asked about pools created for
drainage and the mosquito problems they could create. Mr. Cermola
explained that the pools are retention basins which will have outlets
to drain out and not left for water to seep into the ground. Mr.
Manzariz asked if traffic would be studied in the area. ].~r. Rosso
said any proposed subdivision where traffic may be a problem is
BERLIN PLANNING COMMISSION -2- MAY 13, 1986
referred to the traffic commission for a study° Mr. Seelye stated
that this had been done. Mrs. Caron asked if retention basins are
built on lots. Mr. Cermola replied yes. She then asked if ]and
owners can use that land. Mr. Cermola stated yes to some extent.
Mr.. LeBrun of South Slope Drive asked what will happen to the play
area set up in the cul-de-sac. ~4r. Cermola Said it is something to
consider possibly on the five acres not to be used for building
lots. Mr. Salerno read a portion of a brochure he had about the
proposed subdivision and said that the brochure states that 23
homes would be built and questioned why the proposal now calls for
29 homes. Harry ~ie~b~ of Glenuiew asked if the town would be .~
required to maintain the retention basins. Mr. Rosso explained t~at
the town considers recommendations of the Commission in maintaining
these type of things when the road is accepted by the town. Mr.
Seelye stated that the retention basin would be built to recognized
standards and very few basins need to be maintained. Mr. ;Ianzariz
asked the results of the traffic study. Mr. Seelye read the letter
of May 7 from the traffic commission. Mr. Manzariz then pointed
out that nothing was mentioned in the letter about South Slope and
again expressed his concern for safety. Mr. [4anzariz also stated
that 60% of the wetlands will be disturbed and asked if a compromise
could be made to build less homes and not cut through the existing
streets. Mr. Dubuc stated that there is a discrepency in the number
of acres of wetland. He said Mr. Cermola claims there are 15 acres
and be comes up with 18 acres and he would like the Commission to
ch~ck on it. Mr. Seelye stated this is an Inland Wetlands Commission
matter. ~r. Dubuc asked if it is a hard and fast rule to not have
cul-de-sacs. Mr. Rosso and Mr. Seelye replied no, but that they
are discouraged wherever possible and that both South Slope and
Glenview were designed to be extended. Mrs. Caron requested that
the Commission insist on proper drainage and protection for neighbor-
ing ho~e owners. The grade of South Slope was also questioned when
it is extended. Mr. Cermola said it would be a gradual grade. Mr.
Dubuc asked what will happen to the cul-de-sac. Mr. Seelye explained
that the developer would be required to dig up the pavement and
fill in to straighten the cul-de-sac when extended. Mr. Dubuc
suggested cutting down on the number of lots and develop a cul-de-sac
rather than connecting with other streets. He submitted a map with
his ideas. Mr. Salerno stated that he wanted it recorded that he is
opposed to the plans as they now exist. Mr. Cermola is only explain-
ing preliminary plans and the neighbors are concerned about the
drainage and he feels they want to know and understand what is
happening. Mr. ROSSO stated that the concerned neighbors would be
allowed to speak at the Commission meeting. Mrs. Caron asked if a
vote could be taken. ~r. Rosso said no referendum vote could be
taken, and again explained the purpose of a Dublic hearing. Tony
Manzi of Harvest Hill stated that he and his neighbors suffer from
flooding and he can't understand how people will be able to build in
an area downstream. Mr. Manzariz agreed with the other residentS'
comments and that there are many details to be worked out. Mary
Salerno of Glenview brive stated that several properties on Glenview
have catch basins in the back of their lots and she finds this unsafe
with small children. She suggested this type of drainage hot be
used on new lots.
Lot 15A, Block 15. Lew Mirante of MBA Engineering presented a
sk~tch layout of a proposal for 23 acres to be divided into three
building lots, all fronting on Chamberlain Highway. Mr. Rosso
asked for comments of which there were none.
Lot 50A, Lot 53 and Lot 54, Block 74. Sam Carabetta described the
propcsal and Mr. Rosso then asked for conm~ents. Pierre Bennerup
asked how the water will go up to the lots on the hill. ?.~r.
Caraketta replied by wells.
Mr. Rosso closed the Public Hearing at 8:35 P.M. .~
3. Agenda Item 2. Michael Dauria presented a map entitled "Subdivision
Plan, Section 2, Sunmeadow Homes, Ecos Corp., Sunmeadow Drive, Berlin,
Connecticut", dated May 1986, scale 1"=40', by Empire Associates, Inc.,
Plain%ille, Connecticut. This plan is essentially same plan approved
previously but with a minor road realignment. A motion was made by
Mr. Southworth, seconded by Mrs. Wilco× and voted unanimously to
waive the fee. A motion was made by Mr. Southworth, seconded by Mrs.
Mildrum and voted unanimously to grant preliminary approval. A motion
was ma~e by Mrs. wilcox, seconded by Mrs. Larson and voted unanimously
to grant final approval.
4. Agenda Item 3. Bob Dietrick presented a map entitled "Subdivision
Plan, Section II, Subdivision by Robert W. and Barbara Bailly Dietrick,
Road, Berlan, Connecticut", dated May 9, 1986, scal~ 1"=40',
by Hewitt Engineering, P.C., Berlin, Connecticut. A motion was made
by Mr. Southworth, seconded by Mrs. Larson, and voted unanimously to
grant final approval subject to resolving drainage probtems with the
Town Engineer and receipt of the bond.
5. Agenda Item 4. Pierre Bennerup presented a map entitled "Proposed
Subdivision, Map Showing Property of Pierre Bennerup, Toll Gate Road,
Berlin, Connecticut", dated January 30, 1986, revised to May 9, 1986,
scale ]"=50', by Hewitt Engineering, P.C., Berlin, Connecticut. A
motion was made by Mrs. Mildrum, seconded by Mrs. Wilcox and voted
unanimously to grant preliminary approval subject to the approval of the
Health Director. A motion was made by Mrs. Wilcox, seconded by Mr.
Southworth and voted unanimously to grant final approval subject to
approval of the Health Director.
6. }genda Item 5. I4r. Seelye described the area effected by the
abandonment of Bridge Street and Fairview Road. A motion was made by
Mr. South%~orth, seconded by Mrs. Mildrum and voted unanimously to
recommend the abandonment subject to access for the owner of Lot 5A
and sewer easement.
7. Agenda Item 7. Lisa Palmer was present, along with a letter from
her attorney, William Kroll, requesting reduction of a drainage easement
from 50 feet to 20 feet on Lot 59A, Block 74. ~ motion was made by
Mr. Southworth, seconded by Mrs. Mildrum and voted unanimously to
recommend reduction of the drainage easement to 20 feet.
8. Agenda Item 6. A letter from the Mayor proposing to sell a 50 foot
strip of land on Lot 14, Block 84 was discussed. A motion was made by
Mr. Southworth, seconded by ~Lr. Wilcox and voted unanimously to recommend
sale of this 50 foot strip of town owned land.
9. Agenda Item 9b. A motion was made by Mrs. Mildrum, seconded by Mrs.
Wilcox and voted unanimously to place this item on the agenda. A letter
was received from the Zoning Board of Appeais requesting a recommendation
for a variance being sought by Esther Farr on three lots on Chamberlain
Highway. A motion was made by Mrs. Wilcox, seconded by Mrs. Mildrum
and voted unanimously opposing the variance and recommending the
applicant be advised to apply to the Inland Wetlands Commission to get
the required extension of filling area for the necessary 75% of the
lots to be out of wetlands.
10. Agenda Item 9c. A motion was made by Mrs. ~iildrum, seconded by.~
Mr. Southworth and voted unanimously to place this item on the agenda.
A motion was made by Mr. Southworth, seconded by Mrs. Larson and voted
unanimously to release the bond for Whispering Brook, Section IV.
11. Agenda Item 9d. Mr. Seelye read a letter from Allen Hixon Associates
in behalf of Sammy Carabetta regarding setting up a meeting with the
Planning Commission to discuss their ideas on cluster regulations. The
Commission agreed to meet with them at the first meeting they are ready.
12. Agenda Item 9a. A motion was made by Mrs. Mildrum, seconded by
Mrs.. Larson, and voted unanimously to accept the minutes of April 22, 1986
meeting.
13. Agenda Item 8. Action was deferred until May 19 when a special
meeting will be held.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Claire Larson, Acting Secretary
Sharon Guite, Recording Secretary
Typed May 14, 1986