1963/02/261. Regular Meeting Berlin Town Planning CommUtator], February 26, lO63. Members
present: Robert =eanerup, Nunzio Rosso, Henry W[gterbottom, George G~rr~ty,
Aldo C~st~gl~on~. ~lso, J~mes F. K[ss~ae, Town Engineer, ea~ ~rg~ret Gooby.
2. ~[s ~eat~ng w~s c~lled to t~a the place of the February 19 meet~gg which
w~s c~ncell~d ~u~ to weather
3. ~'~. Leon~rd Abr~ho~s~n a ~pe~re~ to d~sc~ss the m~p given prel~n~ry ~Drov~i
~t the February q meets.nE, roDerty of ~eon~rd ~. Abr~h~mson, Berlin, Conh.~
d~ted J~nurry lO63, Scole l"=10O', A. ~,'. Boca. n, C.E.". ~s oroperty fronts on
Reservoir Ro~d ~nd there w~s some question ~s to whet~er it ~ ~ re-s~bd[v[s~n
or not. A publ%c he~r%n~ h~d been s~et ~ February 1c but cancelled ~ue to the
f~ct that our re~ulnr meeting w~s c~ncelled.
}'D. Abrahsmson is ~nx%ous to convey cna portal to s Mr. Hentz[e. Mr. K%ss~ne
suggested that the 1~' strip should be note on the map 'to be conveyed to
Hentz[e" (parcel "A").
It was the consensus of the meeting that Lec~use ne the 8clay that Mr. Abr~h~mson
to sheod with the conveyance of the p8rcel to Mr. Hentzle 8nd stating et the
time that the epprsved m~p [s c.n e~le. ~nether Public Hesr'.ng on this Re-sub-
dtv[s~.on will bo set ear March 19.
. Brook View Park - Mr. Del8 Johnson appeared and presentod the followSng map
Sect%on ~ - brook g[aw kark Map show{ng proposed subdivision of property owned
by Johnson Enterprises, High Road, berl[n, Conn., Jan 30, lO63,scsle 1"=~0',
H. F. Kendrick, C.E."
Section ~ contains ~ dead-end road, w[th cul-de-sac, entitled Rockledge Court.
Nin~ bu~_ld[ng lots fronton this street.
On ~dvise from the Town Sng[.neer that the map ts o.k. engineering-wise, Mr. Rosso,
mpde s motion, seconded by Mz,. ~i, interbottom, that final approval be given,
subject to receipt of 8 bond for the road. So Voted.
~. New Britain Gsa L%ght property - see Item R Pabrusry ~ M'nutes. Mr. K[sssne
reported that after study it was found that this rasp ss presented ~eb. ~ ls not
~ re-subd~.v[s~on but should be entitled Sect'.on II Property Conveyed to ~e New
Bt%rain Gsa L[ght Co. by St~les °c Re~nolds Br%ck Co., December 1, 1963,
Scala 1"=~0', J. D. Wtll[~ms, C.E." -
6. H[gh Speed Msch[ne Products Co. - see Item 3, J~n. lq M[nutes - nothing new.
7. G~odrich property Worthinjton Ridge - see Item 6, FeE. ~ Minutes. Mr. Wm.
=alocki w[shes to have the znne ch~nzed from res%dent[si to retail bus,ness. He
plans t~ convert the ex,siting hpuse sod use it ear s real estate of~ce. As per
the Feb. ~ Minutes we have been requested by the Zen%ne CommSss~on for our recom-
mendation. It was the consensus of the meeting that we write to the Zoning
Commies%on stating that our recommendation is that th~s parcel be left
resident[s1 zon8 ~nd that this %s b~sec] an the fs~t that s change to retail
business would be contrary to the Town Plan sad would not be tn the best interest
of the Town.
A motion to this effect was m~de by G. GsrrSty, ~nd seconded by N. Rosso, sod
Voted.
8. On motion of George Gsrrity, secon~ed by H. W[nterbottom, the M[nutes of th~
Februnry 5 meeting wore approved ss wr[tten. So Voted.
9. Meadow Brook - see Item 3, Feb. 5. ~. Dobrowolski has not presented 8 linen
map to be s{gned 8s yet.
lO. Schultz property behind Ferndsle - see Item ~, Feb. ~. Mr. Rosso reported
that Mr. D~wson, Town Counsel, is preparing sn answer to the letter received
from Mr. Schultz ~nd re~d st the Feb. $ meeting.
11. Item 6 Web. ~ Minutes - G~odr~ch property - see item 7 these m%nutes.
12. New Britain Gsa Light property Chr%stian Lane - Item 8 Feb. ~ N%nutes -
Public Hearing not necosssry see %tam ~ these m~nutes.
13. Correspondence: ~e followlng letters were received from the C.F.P.~Z.A.
~. Letter to all Plsnn[ng Commies{on members regarding B~_ll to cema before
the Legislst~e regarding developers pay[ng s sum of money tn lieu of
setting as[de ~ port~.on of $ subd[v[s%on to be used ss s park or play-
ground. ~[s monoy to be used by the 'lawn on Town-owned p~rks.
b. Letter deser[bing bill to com~ before Legislature r~gsrd[ng Planning
Commlss~o~be[~g 811owed to charge .~25.00 fee for filing s subdivis[on
ar ~i2.90 per lot wh{ch aver amount [s higher. Also fee for inspection
purposes, th~s fee not to exceed .['~.00 or 2~{ of ro~d bond whichever
h igher.
~e consensus was that we should support these bills kn~[ng that they sro not
compulsory to be included in Subdiv[sion Regulations but optional. ~e should
notify o,~ two representst{ves by letter stat%nE that we 8re in sgl'eement with
the two B[lls sod that we will notify them when th~ Hearing on the kills is to
be held. It w~s 81so suggested that ~s many of us ss possible try to attend
the hesr lng.
14. GIschel-Grah~m property - see Minutes - 10/10/42; 10/2/62; 9/18/62; ~n6 7/10/62
Mr. Graham appeared ~nd presented the following site plan for his house - "Site
Plan - Scale 1"=20' Residence for >~. ~ Mrs. Hugh Graham, Bsrlta~ Conn.,
2/21/62, Davi~ C. B~rker Architect 1212 F~rmlngton Ave., W~st Hsrtfor~, Conn."
Information taken from survey by Joseph D. Wlll!~ms, ~te~ July 1062.
It w~s brought out that accor~lag to th~ sits plsn ~ st~e-ysr~ vsrtmnce from the
~Zontng Boar~ of Appeals would be ~ecessary. ~. Klssans stmte~ that tf Mr. Graham
wants his case to be he~r~ at thsir next meeting that he woul~ have to submit his
request before M~rch 4. It was suggested that ~. Glschel work with Mr. Kiss~ne
In preparing his requests.
One of the biggest problems still to be settl~ ts th~ ro~ to s~rvloe this property.
~s Z~ntng Regulations state that bu~l~tng lots should front on ~ Town-owne~ ro~.
At present thf~. property does~comply with t~ts requirement. Messrs. Gfsohel and
Grshsm are willing to set- ss[de the necessary $0' right-of-way for s road but
they would prefer to only improve s minimum width, which Mr. Kisssne ststes would
probably hsve to be two lO' lanes, or 20' wfdth. At present old woodlot roads go
~nto th~s srea but neither Mr. Gischel nor ~. Grsham own free, rage on Shuttle
~{eadow Ave. and to get to their property would ~sve to go over lsnd belonging to
Wick end Holmqu[st. Mr. Graham stated that they hope that both Wick sod Holmqu~st
w'll help w~th the improvement of the road.
If t~ey ere sllowed to ~mprove only the center strip of the rosd sod only for
distance to serv~cethe[r immediate needs, t~e question ~s who would be responsible
to continue the r ~sd tr ~t~er property owners '.n the ares wish to improve their
property. Ir the road {s only ~or pr~vste use by GIschel end Graham property
owners before sod beyond their property l~.nes have the r~_~ht to pass sod repass
over the rosd. They cannot be landlocked. If other people ~mprove their pro-
perties in the ares then there would be ~ quest].on of town-protection for them
re: keeping the rosd open for ffre trucks, ambulances, etc., g~rbsge collection,
otc.
NO 8echelon w~s m~Se pending outcome cf he~r~ng by Zoning Bo~r8 of Appeals.
l~. ~. Rosso st~te~ that he h~ rece~v~ letter from the Town Couasel, Jsmez
Dawson, reg~r~!ng ~ proposal to be ~ritten into the propose~ Town Charter re-
gsr~ing the Pl~n~ng Commission. ~. Rosso in h~s ~usl role ~s Secretary of th~s
Co,remission sod Chairman of the Charter Co~tssfon will review this proposal and
report at our next meeting on his suggestions.
16. Meeting adjourned st 10 P.M.
Respectfu]ly submitted,
O
~ry~ ~