Canterbury Planning & Zoning Commission
Thursday, July 8, 2010, 7:00 p.m.
Canterbury Municipal Building, 1 Municipal Drive
MINUTES*
I.
Call to Order
P. Kelly called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m.
Members present:
Members absent:
Alternates present:
Alternates absent:
Others present:
P. Kelly, W. Moriarty, K. Green, S. Benson, C. Bergman, D. Norell
J. Clark, G. Droesch, M. Weeks
T. Lord
K. Livingstone, R. Weigand
S. Sadlowski, B. Sear, S. Pauley, A. Tillinghast, R. Curtis, K. Sulich, J. Vincent, P.
Riemann, K. Pescatello, M. Sullivan, L. Pecoraro, E. Waskiewicz, and others.
T. Lord sat as a voting member.
II.
Public Participation
R. Curtis of 500 Lisbon Road expressed concern with the events of the last meeting of the Planning and Zoning
Commission on June 10, 2010. He stated he asked the public input be allowed during the Incentive
Housing zone discussion as he had important information to share from the Economic Development
Commission. J. Clark, who was the acting Chairman, stated he would allow this. A motion was not made to
amend the agenda. P. Kelly arrived late at the meeting. R. Curtis stated that he never assumed the Chairman role
on the audio and it was not stated in the minutes. He stated that P. Kelly would not allow public input on the
item. R. Curtis expressed concern that the Commission and the Zoning Enforcement officer were discouraging
during the public hearing portion of the proposed agricultural regulations and that P. Kelly stated that R. Curtis’s
concerns were sarcastic. He stated people at the meeting described P. Kelly’s action toward him as vengeful.
K. Sulich of Lisbon Road asked if the public input would be allowed during the incentive housing zone
discussion. P. Kelly stated this item was for the Commission to discuss only. J. Vincent stated he had nothing to
add to the incentive housing zone discussion tonight.
Justin (did not state last name) of Bennett Pond Road expressed concern about the possible incentive housing
zone. He stated he was unsure of the plan as he just moved into town and he was hearing different rumors about
low income zones. He stated Canterbury was a nice, traditional, small town and he attended the meeting to show
support and to get information.
A Tillinghast, the Chairman of Economic Development Commission, stated that they made a motion at their last
meeting discouraging the Commission from adopting an incentive housing zone at this time pending an
investigation of other ways to achieve the 10% requirement. P. Kelly stated he did not think there would be
discussion on the incentive housing zone at the meeting.
K. Pescatello of Baldwin Brook Road stated he was against the incentive housing zone in this area. He stated that
there were many homes in that area that could get a CHFA mortgage. He introduced the Commission to his
broker, who may be able to help the town meet the 10% requirement.
P. Turner, a mortgage broker with McCue Mortgage Company spoke to those in attendance on CHFA mortgages.
He gave P. Kelly information on the program. He stated that the sale price of homes for the program is $237,000.
R. Sulich of Lisbon Road expressed concern with the number of incentive houses the study was calling for. He
also expressed concerns that both the Conservation Commission and the Agricultural Commission were
recommended and the POCD and both commissions were voted down at a town meeting.
P. Riemann of Bennett Pond Road asked for clarification of the contract the town had with Planimetrics to
complete the POCD. J. Vincent explained that the completed POCD was a two phase project. Planimetrics was
paid to complete phase one from the town. A grant to fund phase two of the update was voted down at a town
meeting. He stated that Planimetrics had already begun working on phase two, so they chose to complete the plan
free of charge. J. Vincent stated the town did not owe Planimetrics any additional funds but that there were only
so many resources the company could supply for free.
K. Sulich of Lisbon Road asked if the town owed money for the POCD map that was created. J. Vincent stated
that surplus funding in the grant that was allocated for another vendor that was no longer needed was readjusted
so that Planimetrics would get paid for the map. K. Sulich questioned who approved this. J. Vincent explained
that the town approved the grant. This was the same grant. S. Sadlowski explained that D. Aubrey was going to
complete some engineering work on the incentive housing zone. He was no longer needed as NECCOG is
doing the engineering for the town so they were able to use these funds for the mapping. P. Riemann suggested
the Commission get full accountings of how the money was spend. B. Kelly suggested he see the treasurer as she
will have this.
III.
Public Hearing
A. Adoption of the Plan of Conservation and Development
J. Vincent presented the Commission with a future land use map that was completed for the POCD.
R. Shinkiewicz of Tarbox Road stated that his property was in a shaded area on the map designated as a
business area. J. Vincent stated this area was designated in the 1997 POCD as industrial. R. Shinkiewicz
stated he was against this area being changed. P. Kelly and J. Vincent tried to explain that this was not
being changed from what it was currently in the POCD.
L. Pecoraro of Cemetery Road expressed concern that the current POCD stated that all uses currently in
place should be grandfathered. He went through the POCD discussing the points he supported and ones
he did not support. He stated that the plan would require more regulations and commissions and
questioned if a town with the population of Canterbury needed the number of regulations it had. He
questioned the need for affordable housing. L. Pecoraro stated that the legal notifications were not
followed.
R. Sulich of Lisbon Road stated the POCD noted there was no state mandate for a town to provide
affordable housing.
K. Sulich of Lisbon Road asked how much in grants would the town be receiving if the affordable
housing zone was approved.
S. Benson expressed his concerns with several items in the POCD. He stated he was concerned with the
potential narrowing of Route 14. He stated he felt the septic management ordinance would be costly for
the town. He stated he was concerned with the scenic road program and mix-uses in a development. S.
Benson stated that he felt more clarification was needed in section 5.2 open space.
T. Lord asked if the town was in the process of looking at homes that would qualify for the 10%
requirement. J. Vincent explained that the town almost met the 10% requirement in the past, but the town
lost many CHFA mortgages.
W. Moriarty made a motion to close the public hearing. C. Bergman seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously.
B. PZ Application #10-7-SE, Town of Canterbury, special exception for upgrading the transfer
station, 111 Kinne Road. Assessor’s Map 21, Lot 5.
D. Norell stepped down from this application for he was a town employee at the transfer station.
S. Pauley, the town engineer, was present at the meeting. He presented plans for upgrading the transfer
station to the Commission. He noted the property had 14 acres of land. S. Pauley showed the existing
conditions of the facility on the plans.
S. Pauley stated that M. Sullivan had completed the wetlands delineations. M. Sullivan was present at the
meeting. All activity was 475’ from the wetland regulated area. The Inland Wetland & Watercourses
Commission approved the application at their June meeting.
S. Pauley stated the entrance to the site would be on the west side. All traffic would be one-way. He
explained that the site would contain seven containers. Five would be open-top, roll-off, 40-yard
containers. He stated these containers would be placed on 8 inch reinforced concrete slabs. He stated the
compacters would be powered by electricity off Kinne Road. He stated that a new transformer would be
installed. The compacters will have small enclosures to protect the equipment from weather.
S. Pauley stated that currently there was little drainage control on the site. He stated that at the suggestion
of IWC, the town would be installing a crushed-rock trench 100 ft long, lined with filter fabric. He stated
they would use ¾” inch to 2 inch stone in the trench. He stated that the site would be graded in the
direction to flow this way. There would also be two catch basins to collect water flow.
S. Pauley stated that a 10-foot berm would be created to screen the site from the Kinne Road. The berm
would be gravel covered with loam and seed. By the road there would be two shallow detention ponds
with a swale running in between them to be used as overflow devices. S. Pauley stated there would be a
security fence around the site. S. Pauley stated there was signage detail on the plan.
P. Kelly asked if there was a place where the containers for bottles and cans the Boy Scouts collected
would be located. S. Pauley stated there could be.
D. Norell of 383 Brooklyn Road stated there were currently 11 containers on the site. He expressed
concern that there were not enough containers to handle the bulky waste that comes in to the transfer
station. He asked if the site could be expanded. He stated that S. Pauley did a fine job re-engineering the
site. B. Sear, the First Selectman explained the locations of the containers. K. Green asked how often the
containers get picked up. D. Norell stated that they get picked up whenever the waste facility is called.
S. Pauley stated there were electric heat, water and sanitary facilities in the animal shelter.
W. Moriarty made a motion to close the public hearing. C. Bergman seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously.
The meeting recessed at this time and was called back to order at 9:06 p.m. D. Norell rejoined the
Commission at this time.
C. PZ Application #10-8-SE, Rawson Materials, Inc, special exception for gravel operation, Depot
Road, Assessor’s Map 52, Lot 16B.
The application was withdrawn.
V.
Discussion on Hooper’s LaneS. Sadlowski stated the Commission was asked to set a bond for Hooper’s Lane. S. Pauley discussed the amount
with the Commission. He suggested he would take more core samples. K. Green asked how the core sample
results came out. P. Kelly stated they all failed. S. Sadlowski stated the bond would be in place until the town
approves the road. The Commission discussed the bonding process. S. Sadlowski stated A. Botello went out to
inspect the road and didn’t see any issues with the road or with the catch basins. The Commission stated they
would take discuss this further at the next meeting.
VI.
Minutes
Regular Meeting: June 10, 2010 - approved
VII.
Old Business
A.
PZ Application #10-5-SPR, American Industries, Inc., site plan review for gravel operation, Tarbox
Road and Butts Bridge Road, Assessor’s Map 61, Lot 5.
A letter requesting an extension was on file. W. Moriarty made a motion to approve the extension. C.
Bergman seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
B.
PZ Application #10-6-SPR, Ed’s Garage, Inc., site plan review for gravel operation, South
Canterbury Road, Assessor’s Map 54, Lots 2 and 4
M. Sullivan and E. Waskiewicz were present at the meeting. E. Waskiewicz was requesting a site plan
review for his gravel operation on South Canterbury Road. M. Sullivan stated that this was an existing
gravel operation that consisted of two parcels. The operation was broken done into phases. There were
four phases. M. Sullivan explained that phase 1 was currently being excavated and phases 2-4 were not
being excavated at this time. He stated that E. Waskiewicz would come before the Commission with a
grading plan for those phases at that time.
E. Waskiewicz stated that he did not need a refueling pad for he fills up equipment with his fuel truck. He
stated he discussed this with the Bureau of Mines and was informed that this was fine. He stated that his
driveway was stone therefore a tracking pad for dust control was not needed. S. Sadlowski just asked that
this be added to the plans.
W. Moriarty made a motion to approve with the following conditions: 1/ This application is approved as
per the submitted plans entitled, “Compilation Plan, Gravel Removal Operation”, sheets 1-3 prepared by
Mark H Sullivan, LS dated 6/4/2010 and, “Phase 1 Grading Plan”, sheets 1-2, prepared by Killingly
Engineering Associates dated 6/4/2010 and revised through 6/24/10. 2/ Excavation along the Northerly
side shall be pulled back to the top of the existing bank along the wetland boundary (in vicinity of WL
Markers 20-30). 3/ This Site Plan Review is only for phase I, a new Site Plan Review will be required
before any other phase is started. 4/ Understanding this is an existing grave bank, the applicant shall work
to minimize the open areas toward a goal of no more than 5 open acres as the process moves forward. 5/
A bond for restoration shall be established and posted as per the applicants engineer, as approved by our
engineer. 6/ Markers to be installed to reference the maximum excavation depth. S. Benson seconded the
motion and it passed unanimously.
C.
PZ Application #10-4-SPR, Wayne LaFramboise, site plan review for gravel operation, Wauregan
Road, Assessor’s Map 66, Lot.
W. LaFramboise was at the meeting to discuss what was exactly required from him for the site plan
review. He stated his surveyor would be working on this but because of hard economic times, he was
experiencing financial hardships. The Commission granted an extension of the application.
D.
Adoption of the Plan of Conservation and Development
W. Moriarty made a motion to adopt the Plan of Conservation and Development with an effective date of
August 1, 2010. The motion was seconded. C. Bergman stated the POCD could be revised at any time
and there was no sense in delaying the approval until all were satisfied. W. Moriarty agreed and stated he
was impressed with how the town and the Commission came together to work on the update. The motion
passed by a vote of 5-2-0. T. Lord and S. Benson voted against the motion.
E.
PZ Application #10-7-SE, Town of Canterbury, special exception for upgrading the transfer
station, 111 Kinne Road, Assessor’s Map 21, Lot 5.
S. Benson made a motion to approve the application with the following conditions:
1/ The application for Special Exception, PZ 10-7-SE for the Town of Canterbury is approved as per the
submitted plans entitled, “Municipal Solid Waste Transfer Station Renovation Project, 111 Kinne Road”
prepared by Northeast Connecticut Council of Governments, 125 Putnam Pike, PO. Box 759, Dayville,
CT, dated June 2010, Sheets Cover, OPP-1, SP-1, LSP-1, DET-1. 2/ This approval is conditional on the
receipt of the necessary State of CT Dept. of Environmental Protection permit(s). 3/ This approval allows
the temporary operation of the Transfer Station at a site to be determined by the Town and approved by
the ZEO provided it has adequate safety and environmental safeguards for no more than 3 months while
the current site is renovated. 4/ Minor changes, as necessary, may be approved by the ZEO if no safety or
environmental concerns are present. 5/ Lights, if required, shall be full-cutoff style and shall be chosen
and designed to minimize the glare onto neighboring properties. 6/ A sign shall be placed near the
entrance indicating an emergency number(s) that can be dialed 24 hours a day in the case of an
emergency at the site (can be 911 or local Town contact). 7/ This approval hereby allows a suitable sign
to be installed at the front of the facility as per our sign regulations. 8/ At the close of each days
operations, the operators of the facility shall walk the facility grounds, including along the road in front of
the site, and remove any garbage that may have dropped or blown. 9/ A spill kit shall be present at the
transfer station and at least on employee on duty trained in its use. W. Moriarty seconded the motion and
it passed unanimously.
VIII.
New Business - None
IX.
Other Business
A. Correspondence- Reviewed
B. ZEO Report- S. Sadlowski stated that he was in contact with Anchor Engineering who stated that the plans
for the Yaworski gravel operation would be completed by next month’s meeting.
C. Any other appropriate business brought before the Commission
P. Kelly asked the Commission if there was a need to hold a meeting in August. Several members stated that
D’Amato, Hooper’s Lane was on the agenda for August.
T. Lord asked who decided to have the Vargas’s arrested. P. Kelly stated the Housing Prosecutor brought
forth the warrant for the Vargas’s arrest. He stated that it should have been done another way. P. Kelly stated
the town has been trying for years to get Vargas to comply with the court order. W. Moriarty stated he was
sure the Vargas’s were given many warnings about the possibility of arrests if they did not comply with the
orders of the housing prosecutor. S. Sadlowski explained that the housing prosecutor issued the arrest
warrant. He stated the Vargas’s were to turn themselves in, but when the police were called to the property for
another issue, they were arrested on the warrants.
X. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Melissa E. Gil
Land Use Secretary
* as recorded
Cc:
PZ members; Town Clerk; Applicant files; PZ files