Information regarding the Incentive Housing Zone

From the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of January 30, 2012

I will be reviewing these minutes from the meeting as well as planning to speak with some of the business owners downtown regarding the Incentive Housing Zone for their input.

At the same time, I welcome anyone that wants to offer their input to me directly – I can be best reached via email – Jason@Zandri.net

14. Incentive Housing Zone (Att. 14A & 14B)
Ms. Bush reviewed the discussion topics (Att. 14B) item by item.

1. Height of Buildings – Ms. Bush stated that the proposed IHZ would allow 4-story buildings to be financially advantageous for developers to build. She stated that if the buildings were limited to 3-stories the plan would still work.

2. Parking Garage – Ms. Bush stated that a parking garage is a better use of the land rather than parking lots. The guidelines within the IHZ would not allow for a New Haven style concrete block parking garage.

3. Commuter Rail Parking – Ms. Bush stated that DOT is looking at the site next to Judd Square and also at the North Cherry Street lot along with a location across the street from that. At the North Cherry Street location there would be a split platform.

4. Required Parking – Ms. Bush provided and reviewed a chart showing proposed IHZ parking, present zoning parking standards and a parking credit schedule chart.

5. Protection of Historic Buildings – Ms. Bush believes that there is only one building in the IHZ that would be considered historical. If that is a concern she suggested that one building footprint be taken out of the IHZ.

6. Width of Sidewalks – Ms. Bush doesn’t believe there is an issue with the existing sidewalk widths. If there is no sidewalk in front of a proposed IHZ the regulations require that the developer put them in as long as it does not make the project financially infeasible.

7. Special Permit vs. Site Plan – Ms. Bush doesn’t know what standards would be used in a Special Permit approval as opposed to Site Plan. She explained that if this approval is made a Special Permit the Town is out of the IHZ program. Connecticut State Law requires site plan only. If it is not part of the IHZ there cannot be design standards. CT State Law does not permit architectural standards under site plan review. If this is not done as part of the IHZ the town loses control over what the buildings look like.

8. State Control over Local Zoning – Ms. Bush pointed out that if the State gives the Town money for a project the Town has to build it to State standards. When the Federal Government gives the Town money for the Linear Trail it has to be done the way the Federal Government wants it done. For this project all the state would care about would be keeping the minimum density under the IHZ and that 20% of the units be affordable. The State does not care what the Town architectural standards or parking standards are. Ms. Bush stated that there are strings attached whenever you are dealing with the State or Federal government.

9. Children in the IHZ – Ms. Bush provided and reviewed a chart she put together with information she got from the Wallingford Transportation Department showing “School Age Children in Selected Multi-family Developments”.

10. Required Infrastructure Improvements – Ms. Bush stated that the regulations say that the sidewalks and streetscapes have to be done as part of development.

11. Traffic – Ms. Bush provided a study showing existing traffic in the IHZ along with calculations on how much traffic would be added in the a.m. and peak hours. These increases would take place very gradually over a fifteen or twenty year period. Every time something is approved the traffic incrementally increases in this area.

12. Density - Ms. Bush provided a density study for the DA developments in town. In the IHZ there would be 20 – 25 units per acre.

13. Taxes – Ms. Bush provided and reviewed “Property Tax Examples”.

14. IHZ Examples using Existing Wallingford Buildings – Ms. Bush provided and reviewed some existing “Mixed Use Examples”.

Chairman Seichter discussed each item with the Commission.

Ms. Baxter and Mr. Matarazzo would be more comfortable with the buildings being 3-story rather than 4-story. All of the other members would find 4-story buildings acceptable.

Chairman Seichter agreed with Ms. Bush that the regulations provide design standards that would not allow a parking garage that the Town would not be happy with. Mr. Birney feels that having a parking garage built with design standards makes sense. No other Members commented.

The issue of Commuter Rail parking still has to be decided by the State.

Ms. Bush reviewed the parking credit system for the Commission.

Regarding the Hall Elton building, Mr. Birney feels that cutting that footprint out of the IHZ would make sense. Ms. Baxter agreed with Mr. Birney and also suggested that Ms. Bush check to be sure that there are no other buildings in the area that would be considered historical. Ms. Bush will look into it. Mr. Fitzsimmons doesn’t want to see the building torn down but he wouldn’t want the Town to limit  itself and completely cut out that footprint in case a developer wants to come in an possibly link a few sites and do some improvements to that building.

The Commission had no comments on the sidewalk widths.

Mr. Fitzsimmons would be concerned that if this were to be done as a site plan there would be no requirement for public input. He feels that with a special permit the Commission has a little more flexibility. Ms. Bush stated that the Town would be loosing architectural control if it were to go with a special permit. She discussed the “Village District” concept with the Commission but she doesn’t feel that downtown Wallingford would be considered a “village’. Mr. Fitzsimmons stated that to have architectural control he would support a site plan over a special permit. Ms. Bush stated that if this were to be a special permit the architectural standards and infrastructure improvements could not be included. Chairman Seichter agreed with Mr. Fitzsimmons to support a site plan over a special permit. Mr. Birney feels that the Commission would have to have some real facts and talking points to present to the Town Council regarding this issue. Ms. Bush stated that a special permit is defined as a use that is permitted in a particular zone but may not be appropriate on every single parcel of land. Mr. Birney feels that if it were likened to a special permit process people would feel more comfortable with the discretion that the Commission would still have.

Ms. Bush stated that state law only requires a minimum density of 20. The plan is to have 26 to give developers incentive. If there is a concern with density the town can go down to 20. Mr. Birney is in favor of keeping the density at 26. The Commission agreed to keep the density at 26.

Ms. Bush explained that if the project goes under the IHZ the development is required to have 20% of the units as affordable to people making 80% or less of the median family income.

The Commission reviewed the proposed regulations.

Mr. Fitzsimmons discussed the section on professional consulting review fees. He would like to see this section cleaned up so it is very clear that any fees would be discussed and agreed upon in advance of the application. It should be made clear that if they do not pay it would be grounds for denial. Ms. Bush agreed to look at that section and try to modify the proposed regulations to make that issue clearer.

Ms. Bush agreed to make the suggested changes to the proposed regulations. She suggested that a public hearing could be scheduled for the end of February. The Commission scheduled a meeting for February 27th and will cancel there regular meeting on the 15th.

Mr. Birney made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fitzsimmons and passed unanimously by a voice vote. The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:13 p.m.