Loading...
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