Commission on the City Plan

LAST REVISED 3/19/10 9:30 am MINUTES COMMISSION ON THE CITY PLAN Tuesday March 16, 2010 - 7:00 P.M. 23 UNION STREET NORWICH CONNECTICUT LOWER LEVEL CONFERENCE ROOM REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEMS A, B & C – CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL, DETERMINATION OF QUORUM: Chairman Ralph Page called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Commission Members Present: Ralph Page, Jeremy Booty, Arthur Sharron, P. Michael Lahan, Frank Manfredi, Les King & John Mathieu Absent: n/a Also Present: Peter Davis, Director, and Jacquie Barbarossa, Recording Secretary A quorum was present. D. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: Upon motion by Michael Lahan and second by Art Sharron, the Commission voted unanimously to APPROVE the minutes of the 02/16/2010 Regular meeting. E. COMMUNICATIONS: 1. SDP #998 CUMA LLC – 257-259 West Town St. submitted bond for $63,251 and mylars for recording on 2/17/10. Michael Lahan made a motion for acceptance, John Mathieu seconded, unanimous F. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Motion by Jeremy Booty to appoint Ralph Page as Chairman, seconded by John Mathieu, unanimous APPROVED. Motion by Les King to appoint Jeremy Booty as Vice-chair, seconded by Michael Lahan, unanimously APPROVED. G. PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE H. OLD BUSINESS: NONE I: NEW BUSINESS: 1 LAST REVISED 3/19/10 9:30 am 1. SDP #999-A – 153 Hunters Rd. & 115 Merchants Ave. – Re-approval of Ponemah Villa Estates, LLC for the phasing construction of a 90-Unit Active Adult community with associated access drives, parking, recreational trail, community center and other amenities, located within R-20 and R-40 zoning districts and owned by the applicant and Joseph McMahon. Peter Davis gave a time line why there was a request for re-approval. He stated the Site Plan was approved in January 2009, the applicants had 3 extensions but due to the economy the bonding could not be worked out and the site plan was not filed in a timely fashion. He stated there are provisions in the regulations that allow applicants to file for re-approval in a 5-year period. He stated there was some confusion regarding the City Council’s decision to rescind the Active Adult Community regulations. He presented a letter from Sean Sullivan of Corporation Counsel for review. Peter stated that in accordance with Corporation Counsel’s opinion, that the Commission was to set aside the issue of publication of the ordinance rescinding the ordinance and that Corporation Counsel advised to consider the application as a re-approval under section 17 of the City’s regulations. Peter also stated that the CCP should review as if the regulation is still on the books. Michael Lahan questioned as to the letters inconsistency stating the Commission should review “de novo” stating that de novo means as of today. Peter Davis stated it should be reviewed as of the old application date. He also stated no changes were made to the original layout, the number of units or the construction of the project. The only difference was that staff had worked with the applicant and asked the applicant to phase the project and showed the phasing plan to members. The 1st phase was broken into sub phases. There was no change to the number of units or setbacks. Art Sharron asked about toxic material being dumped on the site and asked if anyone had been out to the site. Peter Davis stated that was not an issue for the CCP and should be referred to the Health or Blight Department and DEP if it was true. Peter stated the CCP has no regulatory authority through the site plan process for hazardous materials or bulky waste and noted Art’s concerns. Michael Lahan, stated he had issues without proper review of Counsels letter dated 3/16/2010 and questioned as to why the commission must go back to 2009 – that question is not addressed in the letter. Peter Davis referred to section 17.1.8 that speaks to the issue of filing site plans and the issue of filing extensions. There is a difference between a site plan not being filed within the time frame and a site plan that’s been approved that have expired. Section 17.1.9 deals with an applicant that had a site plan approved states that there is a 5-year period for re-approval. Michael Lahan made a motion to table the item until Corporation Counsel could give opinion if 3 extensions were granted and no site plans were filed, why the Commission has to go back to 2009. Seconded by Frank Manfredi. In favor - Ralph Page, Arthur Sharron, Michael Lahan, and Frank Manfredi. Opposed - Jeremy Booty Attorney Glen Carberry of TCORS asked to allow presentation to go forward to clarify any questions the Commission had. He said it wasn’t fair to the applicants and for the 2 LAST REVISED 3/19/10 9:30 am Commission to take the item off the table and to reconsider the action of tabling the matter. Jeremy Booty asked if the regulations could be read to the Commission. Motion by Art Sharron for recess to obtain a copy of the regulations, seconded by Jeremy Booty, unanimous. Meeting was resumed and Peter Davis read section 17.1.8 to the Commission. Peter stated that the rules had not changed. John Mathieu asked when the City Clerk published the legal notice for the Active Adult Community since the letter had different dates. Jeremy Booty asked if he could ask the applicant when the notice was published since there might be typo in Corporation Counsel letter. Attorney Carberry stated the ordinance removing the Active Adult Community was effective February 10, 2010. A full year went by after the ordinance was passed and the applicant’s attorney, Bill Sweeny was the one that notified the City Clerk that the ordinance was not published. John Mathieu asked when the applicant filed for the re-approval. Peter Davis stated it was February 10, 2010. Jeremy Booty asked if Peter Davis had independent knowledge when the notice was published and confirmed that the ordinance was published on February 10, 2010. Michael Lahan wanted opinion from Corporation Counsel as to why the Commission had to go back to the regulations in effect at the time of the approval. Attorney Carberry asked to present again instead of tabling. Jeremy Booty made a motion to put the item back on agenda. Seconded by Ralph Page. In favor - Jeremy Booty, Ralph Page, Art Sharron. Opposed - Michael Lahan and Frank Manfredi. Attorney Carberry made presentation for re-approval. After receiving Special Permit and Site Development Plan approval in January 2009. He stated the applicants missed the one-year deadline since they were unable to get financial bonding and to file the mylars. Approval notices were published in the Norwich Bulletin the following week as required. The Special Permit was recorded in the Norwich Land records but the mylar site plans were not. He stated that Section 17.1.8 states if an applicant fails to file the approved site plan within 1 year he must return for re-approval of the site plan. The site development plan remains active but is subject to re-approval, regardless of the Councils actions for failure to publish the ordinance. Attorney Carberry stated that the projects underlying use was an Active Adult Community, which was issued by Special Permit and not by the Site Plan. A Special Permit becomes a permitted use (similar to a use variance), is recorded in the land records and runs with the land as an exception to title and does not expire. Connecticut 3 LAST REVISED 3/19/10 9:30 am Courts have adopted the rule that a Commission cannot put an expiration date or require re-approval of Special Permits that would turn a permitted use to an illegal use after a time period. Frank Manfredi stated that it doesn’t matter whether the ordinance was repealed or not since the special permit was issued under a valid regulation. Mr. Carberry stated his firm was in agreement with Corporation Counsel regarding the validity of the ordinance that was passed on February 2, 2009 but not published in the newspaper until February 10,2010. Notice was not placed in the newspaper until after Attorney Sweeney from TCORS discovered the problem and notified the City of the error. Mr. Carberry requested that the Commission grant re-approval since they have a valid zoning classification under the Special Permit, the Active Adult regulations were not repealed until after the applicant reapplied. The layout has not changed; the only modifications were to reduce the bond amount and to divide the project into phases per the City’s Planning Department. Mr. Lahan asked for clarification on the Phasing and bonding amounts. Peter Davis explained that the bonding was reduced due to the phasing and it’s the policy of the Planning Department to now phase large projects for better control of the site during the construction phase. The City Engineer reviewed the total new bonding amount with the first sub phase consisting of 19 units. Ralph Page asked for questions from the Commission, there were none. Peter Davis asked if the request for re-approval was addressed. Frank Manfredi agreed that the Special Permit runs with the land and that the applicants have a right to put an Active Adult Community on the land and it doesn’t matter whether the ordinance was repealed or not. Jeremy Booty made a motion to approve SDP #999A, Frank Manfredi seconded. In favor- Ralph Page, Jeremy Booty, Arthur Sharron and Frank Manfredi, Opposed - Michael Lahan. Motion APPROVED. Frank Manfredi asked if the CCP could have a rule that the Commission does not have to act on legal opinion letters unless they are received a week before the meeting. Jeremy asked for suspension of rules to pass the new rule - Unanimous Jeremy made a motion: Issues where a legal opinion has been requested from Corporation Counsel in order to assist in making a decision, the CCP will not act unless that opinion is received at least one week before the meeting. Art Sharron seconded, unanimous, APPROVED. J: EXTENSIONS: NONE K: BOND RELEASES: NONE L. ZONING MATTERS: NONE 4 LAST REVISED 3/19/10 9:30 am M. OTHER BUSINESS: 1. Sewer Authority Referral Peter Davis stated that the 8-24 referral was for rehab and improvements to the existing facility. Jeremy Booty recused himself from the vote. . Mike Lalima from Norwich Public Utilities made a presentation regarding the history and proposed rehabs and upgrades to the existing facility. He invited the Commission for a tour. He stated that the expansion would take between 6-10 years to complete. Peter Davis stated it was consistent with the City’s Plan of Conservation and Development, Chapter 11 . Art Sharron made a motion to send a positive recommendation to the Council, seconded by Michael Lahan, unanimous, APPROVED. N. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Art Sharron, and second by Michael Lahan, the Commission voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 8:21 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jacquie Barbarossa, Recording Secretary 5