Planning Commission

Planning Commission Minutes September 18, 2024 Virtual Meeting hosted on Zoom Page 2 on Auto Repair for a Previously Approved Site located within the Public Water Supply Watershed District.) Zoning Commission public hearing scheduled for September 24, 2024. Mr. Chiocchio made a motion to give this a positive recommendation with the addition of the following provisions to the proposed amendment language: 1) All required certifications shall be submitted, prepared, signed and sealed by a professional engineer licensed and registered in the State of Connecticut. 2) Limit to Class II only. 3) The minimum lot area shall be three (3) acres and be located in the CA-80 Zoning District. 4) The use shall be served by municipal water and sewer. 5) The facility shall be licensed as a new car dealer in accordance with the State of CT DMV requirements. 6) All activities related to auto repair servicing, including detailing/washing, shall occur within the primary building, which shall not be located within 100 ft. of a wetland/watercourse that drains into a reservoir. 7) The on-site storage of fuel shall be prohibited. 8) Auto body repair shall be prohibited. 9) Loading areas/docks shall be covered. 10) The applicant shall obtain any and all necessary permits from CT DEEP for wastewater discharges. 11) All repair, loading areas/docks, and washing/detailing activities shall have floor drains that discharge to a properly designed and sized oil-grit separator that directly discharges to municipal sanitary sewer. 12) Containment for any hazardous materials, including the storage of vehicle fluids and lead-acid batteries shall be 125% of the size of the containment vessel. 13) Hooded catch basins shall be utilized in the stormwater management system. 14) Submission of a Spill Prevention Plan. 15) Submission of a Waste Management Plan that includes the removal of all liquid waste related to the servicing and detailing of automobiles. The reasons given for the positive recommendation are: this proposal is in compliance with the Land Use and Environmental Resources goal of the Plan of Conservation & Development which recommends review and update of the regulations to ensure the City’s environmental resources are adequately protected. And with the addition of the provisions listed above, the necessary precautions would be in place to enhance protections in the watershed. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Hoffstaetter and passed unanimously by voice vote with five ayes (from Mr. Chiocchio, Mr. Haas, Mrs. Hoffstaetter, Mr. Salvagne, and Chairman Finaldi). Planning Commission Minutes September 18, 2024 Virtual Meeting hosted on Zoom Page 3 8-24 Referral – September City Council Agenda Item #4: Request for Renewal of Previously Approved Water & Sewer Extensions for Parcels on Great Plain and Great Meadow Roads. Mrs. Hoffstaetter made a motion to give this a positive recommendation subject to the same density restriction limiting this to 63 single-family homes. This recommendation is also subject to compliance with the Zoning Regulations development standards, the standard Public Works/Engineering Dept. requirements for sewer & water main extensions and, lastly, all final plans and documents should be approved by Corporation Counsel prior to acceptance and recording. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salvagne and passed unanimously by voice vote with five ayes (from Mr. Chiocchio, Mr. Haas, Mrs. Hoffstaetter, Mr. Salvagne, and Chairman Finaldi). PUBLIC HEARING(S): 3775, LLC – Application for Special Exception/Site Plan Approval for Nine Home Cluster Development (Section 4.A.6.) in the RA-20 Zone – 1, 3, & Un-numbered lot Pembroke Road ( G08029, G08030, & G08098) – SE #800. Chairman Finaldi read the legal notice regarding this application. PE Benjamin Doto spoke in favor of this application. He said also with him this evening is the applicant, Edward Kilian Jr. and PE Ray Janeiro from Down To Earth Consulting (DTEC), which is a Geotechnical and Environmental Engineering firm. He said Attorney Marcus is representing Mr. Kilian but he had a conflict so he will not be here this evening. He said they also have a landscape architect, Dean Pushlar but he too is not here this evening. He then described the location as being a 5.1 acre site located on Pembroke Road that is across the street from the Cue Restaurant and Stetson Place. He said there are existing buildings on the site that have been used for commercial purposes. The site was rezoned last year from RA-40 (one acre zoning) to RA-20 (half acre zoning). He continued saying that this proposal is for a nine home cluster development, which does not give you more density, it pushes the units together and limits the amount of roadway and driveway while promoting the use of the open space. There is City water and sewer available to serve the proposed units. These will be single-family detached residences that will all be located on one lot, similar to a condominium development where people will own their house and the land that it sits on but everything else will under common ownership. The road that is shown on the plans will be a private road that will not be maintained by the City. It will look just like a City street, but technically is a private driveway. They are also proposing a swimming pool with a pool house and a sports court in the back. These will be located in the open space area and will be for the use of the residents of the development. There is a cul-de- sac at the end of the roadway to allow people to turn around and also some parking at the pool area. The site will be improved with a stormwater management system, and there are some wetlands located in the back of the property along the border of the Amber Room property. There also are wetlands located across the street and on the property to the north of this site. They received approval from the Environmental Impact Commission during Planning Commission Minutes September 18, 2024 Virtual Meeting hosted on Zoom Page 4 the summer. EIC did ask for some additional information which is just an expanded landscape plan and a sequencing plan on how the material is going to be removed from the site. He said they also had concerns about some old machine and farm equipment, and some car frames located in the woods on the site. These all were there when the applicant purchased the property and will be removed from the site as part of the development. He said both of the commercial buildings have been demolished. They do have to do some extensive rock removal as there is a lot of ledge on the site. He said they will need to remove 120,000 cubic yards of material in order to build what they are proposing. He said the wetlands commission asked that there be no crushing or processing of materials on the site. The applicant has agreed that when the rock is excavated, it will be loaded and hauled off site, and any crushing or processing of the materials will be done at a proper facility. One of the biggest issues with this site is that it sits on the inside of a curve when you are traveling north and south on Pembroke Road. This proposal was designed with the intent to make significant improvements because as it exists, there are some bad sight lines coming either way. There also is some topography that will have to be removed in order to address this issue. He then shared his screen to present a colored version of the site plan. He pointed out the areas where the grade will need to be taken down. He then referred to the grading plan showing the significant amount of material to be removed in order to the lower the grades to the site. He said they evaluated the drainage at three locations and with the installation of the stormwater drainage system, they are proposing reductions in stormwater runoff at all locations and overall for the site. He referred to the new landscaping plan which is different than what was submitted with the application. He said that the Planning Department asked for more trees and some planting beds. He spoke about the construction plans, explaining the phasing plans, and where the will store the building materials. He pointed out where the sidewalks will be installed and said there is plenty of parking available. Each house will have a two-car garage and there is room for two more cars in each driveway. The houses will all be about 3,000 square feet in area including the garage which is about 500 square feet. He said he would leave the rest of the presentation to Mr. Janeiro. PE Ray Janeiro, from Down To Earth Consulting (DTEC), said this site is generally undeveloped when it comes to rock excavation, there are grades that increase in elevation from west to east and there is an abundant amount of bedrock located on the site. He added that in order for the proposal to work, there will have to be cuts and fills. He said that based on the plans, there will have to be a fifty foot maximum cut along the southern side of the site. He said they will have to do Geotechnical borings and engineering will be required to finalize design of the proposed rock slope. The nearest residential structures are setback about 50 to 200 feet from proposed disturbance limits. In order to maintain the integrity of the slopes, they will be using a qualified blasting contractor, and submitting detailed blasting plans. These plans will include an estimation of blasting induced vibrations versus distance, performance of a test blast, and preconstruction surveys of adjacent properties. He said his company was brought on board because the applicant knew of their work on other Danbury area projects. He explained in complete graphic detail the steps that would be necessary to develop this parcel and maintain the dedicated rock catchment area. He Planning Commission Minutes September 18, 2024 Virtual Meeting hosted on Zoom Page 5 added that this area will need to be cleared out by whoever is responsible for the maintenance of the development. He said it could be a condition of the City’s approval or become something that the Homeowners association would be responsible for. He said there is much more he could say, but there are other issues he needs to discuss. One issue being that rock is variable and they don’t really know what they are dealing with until they start the excavation. He said because of this, Mr. Doto has left a lot of room to the north, south and in the rear in case they need to make a modification to the rock catchment area. He said he worked with Mr. Doto to be sure that what was shown on the site plan could actually be built. He said based on the volume of rock (120,000 cubic yards)that needs to be removed, they are providing recommendations for the design and construction or the excavation. He said that standard practice in all towns, is that prior to any rock excavation or blasting activities, the blasting subcontractor needs to get a permit from the Fire Marshal. This blasting contractor must be licensed and have had enough experience to be able to handle a project of this magnitude. During the actual excavation there are three quality control procedures that will be necessary. The first one is a pre-blast condition survey which will be offered to the owners of parcels within a five-hundred foot radius of this project. There will be test blasts performed and once the charge is detonated, they will collect the data in a seismograph format to be used during the actual blasting. The third is that the blasting subcontractor is required to monitor for over-blasts and vibrations as part of their liability insurance. He said they also recommend that the neighbors hire a separate engineering firm to monitor vibrations and endure that the rock is being removed in accordance with the prevailing standards of care and all applicable safety standards. There were some questions from Mrs. Hoffstaetter and Mr. Chiocchio regarding the location of the rock. Mr. Janeiro pointed out that the majority of the rock excavation will occur towards the rear of the site where the amenities are located. They also discussed how high the excavation would be and Mr. Doto pointed out various areas including the cul-de-sac and said what people will see are the rock faces from the cuts. He added that EIC really pushed for them to add more landscaping to balance the site. Mr. Janeiro then said the bedrock is granitic gneiss, a nice looking pink and white rock, which is important because all of the rock cuts will be aesthetically pleasing versus looking at a concrete retaining wall. There was further discussion about how the rocks will break and maintaining safety and stability of the rock slope. Mr. Doto said based on this specific site, they decided to bring Mr. Janeiro in at this point instead of just hiring him when it is time for them to get the permits. He added that this plan works with the zoning and does not require any variances. It also achieves a lot of the issues that the Zoning Commission had when they approved the rezoning. Chairman Finaldi asked if there was anyone to speak in opposition to this application and two people raised their hands. The first person, Deb Kennedy, 71A Padanaram Road, could not get her microphone to work. Chairman Finaldi mentioned that the hearing will be continued so she can try again at that meeting. The second person to speak in opposition was Ken Gucker, 89 Padanaram Road. Mr. Gucker said he has lived at this location for 38 years and when Stetson Place was built, it Planning Commission Minutes September 18, 2024 Virtual Meeting hosted on Zoom Page 6 did a lot of damage to the area which resulted in many drainage problems for the existing development in this area. Mr. Gucker said that he understands that the experts and engineers know what they are talking about but he just wants to tell the Commission about the issues he had to suffer through. He described how his property was affected by the blasting for Stetson Place even though he is more than five-hundred feet from it. He said this area has quite the ground rock or ledge, pointing out that he has a piece of ledge sticking up in his crawl space that has been there since 1966 when the house was built. He said since the blasting for Stetson Place, he has water problems in the basement, cracks in his floors, and all of his doors are crooked. He said five-hundred feet is not enough of a distance for the blasting because his home was at least two thousand feet from Stetson Place and he had significant damage. He then said with respect to this proposal, he is concerned about the amount of fill they are planning to remove and how long will it take. He also is concerned about the condition of the site because the rock outcroppings are tremendous now. He questioned the idea of a cluster development which he thought was done to preserve the environment. He said this proposal is not preserving any environment, it is removing everything and then re-introducing all the landscaping and the houses onto the site. And requiring maintenance of a site to preserve or protect what the engineers have designed is a job that no homeowners association wants. He said his concern is for after the construction is done and things arise that were not planned for. He added that he knows his property is located within a watershed, and when a house was built on the lot next door, all kinds of water springs popped up. In closing he asked that the Commission take a really hard look at this proposal and also consider increasing the diameter to five-hundred feet for the blasting. Since there was no one else to speak in opposition, Chairman Finaldi asked Ms. Smith which departmental reports they are still waiting for. Ms. Smith said Engineering, Health regarding the grading, and the Fire Marshal, whose review will include the blasting plans. Mr. Janeiro then asked Chairman Finaldi if he could respond to Mr. Gucker’s comments. Mr. Janeiro said Mr. Gucker expressed some real concerns and although he is not familiar with the project Mr. Gucker was referencing, he did want to address the issues. He said when they do the vibrations monitoring, the seismographs are sensitive to any structure that may have an impact associated with the blasting. He added that the human body is also very perceptible and sensitive to all vibrations, even from as far as New Jersey. He said the US Bureau of Mines has done extensive research on blasting and impacts on structure. So that is the reason why the applicant hired them to provide the third party oversight, to be sure that all applicable safety standards are being followed during the rock excavation. In closing he said that he may not know who will be responsible for the maintenance of the site but he develops a maintenance plan for each project and that plan has very often been incorporated into the Homeowners Association (HOA) bylaws. He said his name and phone number are listed on the plan and generally on an annual basis, the HOA hires a qualified PE to check the site out and make sure everything is operating as planned. He added that this is about more than just an overgrown detention basin, it is about the quality of life. At this point, Mr. Doto said that this site is not in the Padanaram