MIDDLEFIELD PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
405 Main Street
Middlefield, Connecticut 06455
Minutes of the January 22, 2014 Special Meeting
Bob Johnson, Chairman, called the special meeting to order at 6:37 pm.
Attendance:
Members Alternates
X / Boyle, Kevin / X / Carlson, BrookeX / Johnson, Robert / X / Tyc, Peter
A / Malcolm, James / X / Wilson, Erin
X / Russ, Jerry
X / Wheeler, Scott / Others
X / Colegrove, Geoff
X / Curtis, Brian
X / Johanson, Alan
A=Absent
X=Present
Erin Wilson was seated on the Commission. Al Johanson arrived at 6:40 pm.
Attorney Jean D’Aquila, Attorney Mark Branse and Attorney Caleb Hamel were also present at tonight’s meeting.
Review of Permitted Uses: Powder Ridge Mountain Park & Resort, LLC
Bob Johnson summarized that last November, the Commission had decided to retain the services of Attorney D’Aquila to review any existing uses at Powder Ridge Mountain Park & Resort. Mr. Johnson then turned the meeting over to Attorney D’Aquila and thanked her for taking this task on.
Jean D’Aquila explained that she is presenting a seven-page memorandum. In addition, there is an appendix form which delineates five documents that are integral to this report. Those documents are available on a flash drive as well as in hard copy.
Middlefield Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
January 22, 2014
Page 11
Attorney D’Aquila will give a broad overview, the details in the memo, the supporting documents are in the appendix and then she will open it for questions. Bob Johnson stated that any questions will be from the Commission or staff only.
Attorney D’Aquila thanked various people for the updates that have been provided to her. Her report has four sections. Highlighted in section one is that on June 13, 1975, public act was passed and later codified which mean that after its effective date, all special permits and variances issued by a Commission needed to be recorded on the land records in order to be effective. Therefore, any activity before July 13, 1975 needs to be researched through the Planning & Zoning Commission files and after that date will be located in the Middlefield land records.
There were four special permits issued before 6/13/75. A memorandum dated May 7, 1975 to the Planning & Zoning Commission is the first document in the appendix. It is important because it was dated very close to the effective date of the public act and contained a very thorough review of the special permits issued by the PZC before that date. The first permit was issued was dated November20, 1970. March 19, 1971 was the second permit. June 11, 1971 was the third and September of 1971 was the fourth permit. The memorandum summarizes which uses were permitted in each of the four special permits, none of which were recorded on the land records as that wasn’t necessary at the time of the permits.
That memorandum contained some additional important information that references efforts at special permit applications by the then owners (the Zemel brothers) for special permit approvals within a few years of the effective date of that act. There had been an initial denial on the special permit application for camping facilities that had been appealed by the Zemel brothers and the result was it went back to the PZC and was ultimately approved on June 4, 1975. That decision was appealed further, by both the Zemel brothers who did not like several of the conditions imposed and some neighbors, named Adams, who did not like the issuance of the permit. Ultimately, that special permit approval was overturned by the Superior Court.
These four special permits are detailed in section 3 of the memorandum. The first two special permits (11/20/70 and 3/19/71) were basically skiing-related activities. The details of these two permits are set forth in Attorney D’Aquila’s memo. The uses that were approved are included in the memo, however the uses that were not approved are not listed. The PZC had been very explicit in the uses which it was approving, as well as uses which the Commission deemed principle and incidental to the approved uses. These permits included buildings, parking areas, skiing, tobogganing and skating in certain areas. Incidental uses included storage, restaurant and other parking. Attorney D’Aquila explained that the next step would be to have someone locate the site plans which were approved as part of these special permit approvals to understand where all the approved uses were at the time of the permits.
Middlefield Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
January 22, 2014
Page 11
The permit dated 3/19/71 was again related to skiing activity. This included additional skiing, housing, new driveway and signage and parking. Principle uses were described. Some incidental uses included parking and a traffic loop system.
Attorney D’Aquila went on to the permit dated 6/11/71 which is where approvals appeared for items which were not ski-related. This was an effort to make use of the property from May 1 to October1. The PZC was clear to delineate approved principles uses and those deemed incidental. A cabana or swim club, outings and picnics, with restrictions, were approved. A pool, bath house, docks, tennis courts, trails, operation of the chair lifts on the ski slopes for entertainment, a pavilion, a lodge and use of the steak house and snack bar were approved. Cultural activities approved summer theater performances, meetings, conferences, workshops, religious services and the like, but these uses were later modified by the fourth permit. There were restrictions and conditions placed on the concerts that could be held.
The special permit dated September, 1971 was an application to amend or modify much of what had been considered in the permit dated 6/11/71. The number of events per season was limited to 35, with no more than three per week and a maximum of 2,000 persons attending any one event. No overnight guests were allowed except those registered in the lodge and all events were to be over by 11:00 pm.
A question was asked about the permit regarding the location of skiing and the need to come to the Commission regarding any new ski slopes developed. Attorney D’Aquila stated that that restriction would still be in place today. Geoff Colegrove commented that he has seen the locations of specific slopes on site plans at the Town Hall.
Attorney D’Aquila went on to summarize the permits recorded on the land records. In 1983, MARC, as an applicant, with the Zemel brothers as owner, sought for approval of a group home for seven mentally-handicapped residents. There was a special permit issues in 1984 to amend a special permit to allow permanent housing for two families of owners and up to seven management and maintenance employees. Another special permit from 1985 abandoned an existing exit road, making the entrance road two ways and also relocated a smaller parking lot. There was a variance granted in 1990 to allow a building within two feet of a property line. There was then a certificate of declassification to take away special tax treatment filed by the tax assessor.
A declaration of conveyance was filed by Sean Hayes at the time he acquired title from the Town of Middlefield which stated that $2 million would be spent in permanent improvements on the property by December 31, 2014 and that the operation of downhill skiing would be up on or before December 31, 2014.
Middlefield Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
January 22, 2014
Page 11
Attorney D’Aquila explained that none of the applications about a water park were ever recorded on land records nor were they approved. Attorney D’Aquila also explained that the relocation of the steak house which was approved last year has also not been recorded on the land records.
Geoff Colegrove asked about a map showing the relocation of a youth summer camping facility. Attorney D’Aquila stated that she did not see summer camping as approved use. In fact, the Commission had resisted approving camping throughout all of these approvals. Attorney D’Aquila will look into this issue further. Mr. Colegrove explained that it was Ken Leavitt who came before the Commission in the 90s to move the location of the youth camping area further south. Attorney D’Aquila remarked that this kind of camping was perhaps included under cultural activities.
Bob Johnson asked about the 6/11/71 permit regarding outings and family picnics that limits those to a one-day event. Attorney D’Aquila agreed that a weekend event would not be considered under these terms. Mr. Johnson also asked about MARC and whether there is any relationship to the Nerden camp. Attorney D’Aquila that Nerden camp is north of the property and this was not that. This appears to have been approved, but never built. She explained that that permit was nontransferrable.
Geoff Colegrove also commented that the pavilion to accommodate 2,000 persons was never built.
A question was asked if there was verbiage to differentiate between principle recreational uses and principle cultural activities. Attorney D’Aquila stated that the Commission went into a lot of effort to describe principle cultural uses. The recreational uses were specifically limited to cabana or swim club and outings and family picnics. Attorney D’Aquila did not find time limitations on skiing.
Kevin Boyle asked if a list of acceptable uses would be available any time soon. Attorney D’Aquila stated that she tried to provide a list in pages 3 through 6 of her memorandum. She reminded the Commission that that list would not include uses that might be permitted as of right in the zone. Bob Johnson explained that this is a first step. Mr. Johnson wanted the Commission members to digest this information before proceeding further. If the Commission desires a final list, Mr. Johnson suggested it would probably be more cost effective for Attorney D’Aquila to do that. Erin Wilson would really like to see the maps. Attorney Mark Branse agreed that it would make sense to have Attorney D’Aquila continue with the project. Attorney D’Aquila agreed to continue with the project and she will try to return back to the Commission in two weeks.
Middlefield Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
January 22, 2014
Page 11
Attorney D’Aquila asked if the Commission wanted to see a list of what was not approved as well. Kevin Boyle stated that he would like to know what the nos were as well as what the yeses were. Geoff Colegrove stated that the nos were primarily camping. Attorney D’Aquila stated that there were things specifically denied in connection with the applications that were ultimately modified and approved. Additionally, there were also other applications that were just flat-out denied and that would take much more effort to highlight all of those. Kevin Boyle was not looking have to Attorney D’Aquila research failed special permits, but just really wanted to see what was not approved within the special permits that were.
Erin Wilson asked if there was any idea of how many special permit applications were denied. Attorney D’Aquila stated that she gave up counting, but she knows of at least eight. There were many, many applications regarding the water park.
Attorney D’Aquila did state that there was not one site plan that showed everything. She will limit her review of the denied uses to those uses that were denied in connection with the four special permits that were ultimately approved and/or modified.
Scott Wheeler will forward the documentation from the flash drive to the Commission members via email. Bob Johnson will also have the contents printed.
Brian Curtis remarked that when site plans or special permits are approved, the time clock starts from date of approval and he would like to know what the current requirements are. Attorney D’Aquila stated that that statute has changed about 600 times. Attorney Branse does not know if the time limits existed when the special permits were granted. Brian Curtis asked what the time limit is for new applications and Attorney D’Aquila felt it was nine or 10 years for site plans. Attorney Branse stated that the current time limit is for construction to start within two years of the effective date of the approval and could be extended. Attorney Branse commented that any special permit approved prior to the current regulation is still governed by what was applicable at the time. Erin Wilson suggested that the time limits be added to the list of approvals.
The Commission took a short break at this point.
Subdivision and Interior Lot Application: William and Faye Francesco, Ross Road
Attorney John Corona, Pat Benjamin and John McGurr were present on behalf of the applicants. As Attorney Corona had explained at an earlier meeting, the applicants are looking for approval of a third lot on their property and also for that new lot to be considered an interior lot. Attorney Corona reviewed which part of the property is subject of this application.
Pat Benjamin, from Bascom & Benjamin, reviewed the survey map with the Commission. The application has been approved by the Inland Wetlands Commission. Soil testing has also been conducted and a septic system has been designed and approved. More driveway details have been provided and Brian Curtis has also written an approval letter with one comment.
The driveway was then described in greater detail. The septic system plan was also reviewed with the Commission. The lot sizes were also reviewed. Mr. Benjamin reviewed the location of the primary leaching field as well as the reserve system.
Middlefield Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
January 22, 2014
Page 11
A Commissioner asked about where the cars park for the currently existing homes. Attorney Corona explained that the driveway will be shared by all three houses. There is currently an easement for the two lots. A comprehensive driveway easement and maintenance agreement will be developed that will require all three lots to share in the maintenance and upkeep of the driveway. Geoff Colegrove explained that the common driveway agreement could be deemed a consideration of approval. Attorney Branse offered to provide standard wording for driveway agreements in subdivisions that he has available and Attorney Corona welcomed his input.