PLANNING
COMMISSION
P.O. BOX 308
Thursday, February 10,
2005
7:00 p.m. Town
Hall
I.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
a.
Continuation of Resubdivision Application #383: 8-Lots, Stafford and Rocky Dundee Roads,
CGS Development
Chairman Karl
Walton opened the public hearing at 7:00 p.m. Town Planner Patrice Carson read the
legal notice for Items a. and b.
A motion was
made by Brad Pellissier, seconded by Michelle Hayward and unanimously voted to
continue the public hearing for CGS Development’s Resubdivision Application #383
until the next meeting, Thursday, February 24, 2005 at 7:00pm in the town hall
because the applicant is reworking his plans and has requested such a
continuance. It was noted that this
continuance is within the 35-day time frame.
b.
Continuation of Subdivision Application #382: 11-Lots, Isabella Drive Extension,
Leno
Sandy
Aeschlimann spoke to the Commission as a representative for Ric Leno, KRL
Builders. He said that they have
gone through the comments from staff and have given staff revised plans
addressing their issues.
Mrs. Carson
reported that Mr. Leno met with the Conservation Commission last evening and a
response from them is anticipated shortly.
The open space appraisal has come in at $135,000.00, or $1,227.27 per
lot, which would be a condition of approval.
With respect to
the newly revised plans, Mrs. Carson reported that there were three remaining
housekeeping items and the assessor is working on the house
numbers.
As a result of
the first portion of the public hearing, questions had been submitted by
residents of Isabella Drive and given to Stephen Mitchell of F.A. Hesketh &
Associates, Inc. The written
answers from Mr. Mitchell were shared via handout with the Commission and anyone
from the audience wishing to have a copy.
Mr. Mitchell
explained that the report submitted indicated that they reviewed the DLS data
and it was determined to appear accurate.
The intersection of Stebbins and Battle Street is indeed a difficult
one. CRCOG had done an impact study
which resulted in several options to correct the intersection. Mr. Mitchell spoke with staff about the
possibility of correcting the right of way on Stebbins and Town Engineer Merv
Strauss is continuing to look at that as well. Mr. Mitchell considered the most
important issue from the resident’s point of view to be the continuation through
of Isabella Drive.
It is the
conclusion of F.A. Hesketh & Associates, Inc. that it is a good idea to make
the road connection because access through both ends of Isabella Drive is
desirable for safety reasons and makes good traffic flow sense. It would provide more effective
emergency access and would allow a better flow for school busses and plows. It is a natural step for the completion
of the subdivision plan as originally proposed. If the entire subdivision plan had been
submitted all at once, it would probably have been required to be a through
road. When considering the data, it
was taken into account that residents did not want a cut-through created, but in
looking at the over all layout of the area it did not look like this would
become an issue, as it did not appear to be an obvious traffic
maneuver.
Since there
appeared to be much concern on the part of residents, it was noted that the
current cul-de-sac area could allow for the potential creation of a mini round
about, which would serve as a traffic-calming technique. This would help allay neighborhood
concerns and in effect would eliminate any small potential of a possible cut
through situation.
Mr. Pellissier
asked if the creation of the mini round about would make a difficult situation
for snowplows and was told that it would not.
Mr. Aeschlimann
stated that the cul-de-sac was originally intended to be temporary and should a
round about or other traffic-calming technique be constructed, the drainage
potentially would become a problem unless the area were regraded. Ponding may result in the area and would
most certainly need addressing.
Mrs. Carson
remarked that Mr. Strauss had suggested that the calming area could be inserted
in the newly developed area of the road, especially if this would prevent
disturbance to the current drainage.
Karl Walton
asked if putting traffic calming of any type would make a significant amount of
impact to make the work of re-working plans and the amount of effort into
creating them worthwhile. Mr.
Mitchell replied that while in his opinion the potential for traffic impact is
very minimal, the general belief of the residents on Isabella is that there will
be problems anyway. This would help
address their concerns and take the issue of traffic impact level from little to
none.
Mr. Leno asked
if there were other traffic-calming techniques that could be used other than
roundabouts. Mr. Mitchell mentioned
that speed bumps are definitely not recommended because of the resulting vehicle
wear-and-tear as well as the fact that snowplows have much difficulty with
them. One idea that is possible is
called “shakaning”, which are zig-zagging bump-outs in the road that create
undulations and reduce speed.
Sean
McIntyre, 21 Isabella Drive, remarked that much traffic uses Battle
and Turnpike Roads and would most certainly use Isabella as a cut-through. The intersection with Battle and
Stebbins is very busy as well.
Bert
Guerrette, 24 Isabella Drive, showed maps he had made of the various
intersections in the area, and how some of the developments, which had gone from
cul-de-sacs to through roads, were now being used as cut-throughs on a regular
basis by many motorists. Property
values would decrease most definitely, in his opinion. He had counted and discovered that 85 to
100 vehicles during the evening rush time had used the Stebbins
intersection. How many of these
might use a through road if one was created on Isabella? He also added that where Isabella hits
Turnpike Road there would be more traffic and more potential for
accidents.
Mr. Walton
commented that the report stated that 60 vehicles were projected per day, with
10 trips per house, per day, should Isabella remain a cul-de-sac. This is expected to decrease if Isabella
became a through road because traffic would be using both ends of the
road.
Laura
Guerrette, 24 Isabella Drive, was really disappointed in the traffic
study because there was no information included on Turnpike Road and its
intersection with Isabella Drive.
She also felt the report contradictory in stating that there would be
minimal traffic increase, but then recommending traffic-calming techniques. She added that in attending the
meetings, she has been disappointed with the way the Planning Commission members
interact with people. She feels
that it is the Commission’s duty to put resident’s safety at utmost importance
and they are not doing this. She
also submitted a letter for the record.
Denise
McIntyre, 21 Isabella Drive, added her concern for the Commission’s
failure to hold safety as an issue of great importance. She stated that the neighbors concerns
for safety needed to be acknowledged by Commission
members.
Val Giupponi,
68 Green Tree Lane,
questioned as to how much traffic would be coming through Isabella from Turnpike
Road. The report doesn’t include
this information, and he felt this to be an oversight of the traffic
engineers. He also stated that the
neighbors on Isabella had a right to know what factors would be considered when
making a final decision. They
should have some sort of written notice of these factors, so residents know what
the Commission is considering as items of importance.
Mr. Walton
responded that the main concern of the Commission is to see that the Subdivision
Regulations are followed.
Sean
McIntyre, 21 Isabella Drive, stated that if the Battle Street and
Stebbins Road intersection is eliminated in the future, this will create a
cut-through.
Terri Lewis,
8 Isabella Drive, stated
that speed is a concern as well and that many people don’t maintain the 30 mph
current limit. What situation will
a through street create? Might it
not be potentially worse than now?
Jim Maloney,
9 Isabella Drive, stated
that Mr. Leno took the time and effort to pay for a traffic study and the data
that both engineering studies utilized was the same. Mr. Leno’s submitted report showed that
traffic impact would be negligible.
Mr. Walton
stated that the report submitted by KRL Builders did not contain information as
to what would happen if Isabella Drive was made a through road. He neglected to have that information
included in his report as requested by the Commission. For that reason, the Town paid to have
its own report conducted.
Susan Nowak,
210 Turnpike Road, lives
directly across from Isabella Drive and five houses away from the intersection
with Battle Street. She stated that
cars go by her home at 60 mph. Her
daughter had no place to ride her bike until Isabella Drive was put in and she
loves it being a cul-de-sac. She
doesn’t see any benefit of making it a through street and feels that this will
create the loss of a nice, quiet neighborhood.
Discussion
followed about the potential of doing a traffic study of the movement of cars
taking a right from Turnpike Road onto Battle Street, and then a right on
Stebbins Road. Mr. Mitchell said
that a license plate survey could be done, however, his report did extrapolate
that information to determine that through-traffic would be
negligible.
Chairman Karl
Walton stated that the public hearing could not be closed as information was
still needed. A motion was made by
Brad Pellissier, seconded by Cliff Bordeaux and unanimously voted to continue
the public hearing until the next meeting on Thursday, February 24, 2005 at
7:00pm in the town hall.
Chairman Karl Walton called
the regular meeting to order at 8:15 p.m.
Members Cliff Bordeaux, Michael Collins, Michelle Hayward, Brad
Pellissier, and Karl Walton, and Alternates Greg Genlot and Georgeanne Kuzman
were present and constituted a quorum.
Also in attendance were Town Planner, Patrice Carson and Consulting
Engineer, Merv Strauss.
III. OLD
BUSINESS
a.
Discussion/Possible Decision:
Resubdivision Application #383:
8-Lots, Stafford and Rocky Dundee Roads, CGS
Development
Action on this
item was deferred since the public hearing had been continued to February
24.
b.
Discussion/Possible Decision:
Subdivision Application #382:
11-Lots, Isabella Drive Extension, Leno
Action on this
item was deferred since the public hearing had been continued to February
24.
c.
Other
There was no
other Old Business.
a.
Reappoint Open Space/Trails Subcommittee
A
motion was made by Brad Pellissier, seconded by Cliff Bordeaux and unanimously
voted to reappoint all 15 members to the Open Space/Trails
Subcommittee.
b.
Other
A
motion was made by Brad Pellissier, seconded by Michael Collins and unanimously
voted to add the following item to New Business: Appoint
Representative to CCROG Regional Planning
Commission.
A
motion was made by Michelle Hayward, seconded by Cliff Bordeaux and unanimously
voted to reappoint Michael Collins and Brad Pellissier as the regional
representative and alternate to the CRCOG Regional Planning Commission for 2005,
respectively.
V.
STAFF/COMMISSIONER
REPORTS
Patrice
Carson reported that she and Chairman Karl Walton attended the Budget Meeting
held earlier in the day and she gave those in attendance a copy of the Planning
Commission Budget as presented to the Board of Selectmen.
Mrs.
Carson also stated that she is awaiting a grant announcement for the Whitaker
property. The town will apply
hoping to fund some of the purchase.
Karl
Walton reported that he attended the thank you dinner and was the sole member of
the Planning Commission to do so.
He has pins for each of the Commission members and will bring them to the
next meeting.
VI.
AUDIENCE
PARTICIPATION
There
was none.
VII.
CORRESPONDENCE AND
BILLS
Bills
presented were as follows:
APA
dues
$298.00
Journal
Inquirer:
For 10/28/04 meeting
55.09
For 12/2/04 meeting
157.40
For hearing and meeting of 1/27/04
243.97
A
motion was made by Brad Pellissier, seconded by Michelle Hayward and unanimously
voted to pay the bills as presented.
Mrs.
Carson reminded Commission members about a workshop to be held at Wesleyan
University on March 5, 2005. The
fee would be $35.00 per person.
Anyone interested in attending should contact her.
VIII.
MINUTES APPROVAL
A motion was
made by Brad Pellissier, seconded by Michelle Hayward and unanimously voted to
approve the minutes of the October 28, 2004 meeting as
written.
A motion was
made by Michael Collins, seconded by Cliff Bordeaux and unanimously voted to
approve the minutes of the December 2, 2004 meeting as
written.
A motion was
made by Brad Pellissier, seconded by Cliff Bordeaux and unanimously voted to
approve the minutes of the January 11, 2005 meeting as
written.
A motion was
made by Cliff Bordeaux, seconded by Michelle Hayward and unanimously voted to
approve the minutes of the January 27, 2005 meeting as
written.
IX.
ADJOURNMENT
A motion was
made by Michelle Hayward, seconded by Brad Pellissier and unanimously voted to
adjourn the February 10, 2005 Planning Commission regular meeting at 8:37
p.m.
Respectfully
submitted,
Brad Pellissier,
Secretary
Robin Timmons, Recording Secretary
MINUTES ARE NOT OFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVAL
AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING.