Town Vote Stalls P&Z Review Of Fairfield Hills

By Andrew Gorosko

Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) members had planned to field comments at an August 21 public hearing on their set of proposed zoning rule changes for the 189-acre Fairfield Hills core campus, which the town plans to acquire from the state.

But in view of voters’ August 12 referendum rejection of the Fairfield Hills master plan, the P&Z is now expected to postpone any action on such zoning rule changes until some master plan is endorsed by the public.

P&Z Chairman William O’Neil explained August 13 that any Fairfield Hills zoning rule changes that the P&Z would adopt would be keyed to the content of a Fairfield Hills master plan. The P&Z’s intent in revising Fairfield Hills zoning rules is to complement the town’s master planning for that property, Mr O’Neil noted.

Because the Fairfield Hills master plan failed to gain voters’ support August 12, it would seem premature for the P&Z to hold public discussion on specific zoning rule changes, which the P&Z had proposed based upon the master plan’s endorsement by voters, according to the P&Z chairman.

After some Fairfield Hills master plan is in place, the P&Z would then revise its P&Z zoning rules, as needed, he said.

Mr O’Neil said he expects that the Board of Selectmen and the Legislative Council will be addressing the voters’ rejection of the Fairfield Hills master plan. Both the selectmen and council had unanimously endorsed the master plan before it was submitted to the referendum.

The P&Z chairman said he expects the P&Z would open the planned August 21 public hearing, take stock of the Fairfield Hills master planning situation as it stands at that time, and then continue that public hearing to some future session, when the Fairfield Hills master planning process has become clearer. The P&Z session is slated for 7 pm on Thursday, August 21, at Canaan House at Fairfield Hills.

Because Fairfield Hills zoning rule revisions are being proposed by the P&Z itself, and not by a private applicant, the normal schedules and deadlines for P&Z action on the proposal are not in force, leaving the review and action process open-ended.

 

FHAR Zoning

The eventual zoning rule changes would modify the existing Fairfield Hills Adaptive Reuse (FHAR) zoning regulations, which the P&Z created in the spring of 1998, when it appeared likely that the Fairfield Hills core campus would be purchased from the state by some private firm for private redevelopment.

The set of proposed zoning rule changes, which the P&Z had proposed for public discussion on August 21, come in view of the town’s planned acquisition of Fairfield Hills from the state and the town’s planned management of the 189-acre core campus. Fairfield Hills was a state psychiatric hospital until December 1995.

Under the now-stalled rule change proposals, currently permitted uses at Fairfield Hills that would be eliminated include: manufacturing, warehousing, and housing, including elderly housing and affordable housing.

Under that set of proposed zoning rule changes, permitted land uses would include governmental buildings and uses, public libraries, and public museums. Strictly prohibited governmental uses would include garbage dumps, incinerators, garbage disposal areas, municipal garages, and public works storage yards.

Under those proposed rule changes that are now being held in abeyance, permitted private uses at Fairfield Hills would include: retail sales, limited to a maximum of 40,000 square feet per tenant; educational facilities, including accessory housing for such facilities; office space; medical offices; dental offices; laboratories for research and development, for product testing, and for specimen testing; corporate headquarters for one or more corporations; dry cleaning businesses, which do not conduct on-site cleaning; and publishers.

Other proposed permitted uses would be: restaurants, including those with outdoor service, but excluding those with drive-through facilities and outdoor entertainment; indoor and outdoor public and commercial recreational facilities; fitness centers; museums; art galleries; libraries; theaters; movie theaters; movie theater complexes; banks and financial institutions; hospitals; parking structures that are incidental to a principal use of the property; hotels; conference centers; places of assembly; nurseries and greenhouses; and outdoor sporting fields.

The FHAR zoning rule changes would add permitted uses including crop farming in open space areas; personal services, such as barbers, hairdressers and tailors; small stores; child day care centers; and elderly day care centers.

Procedures

Under the stalled proposed zoning rule changes, development projects at the core campus would not be subject to the “special exception” review process as now is the case, but would fall under the “site development plan” review process. Such a procedural change would eliminate the requirement for a P&Z public hearing for a development application.

Under its proposed rule changes, the P&Z would review the Fairfield Hills master plan for campus redevelopment. According to the P&Z, that master plan must include a redevelopment scenario for the property, a description of the redevelopment’s phasing, and a description of the effect that redevelopment would have on the historic aspects of the site, on its natural resources, and on the property’s infrastructure.

That master plan also must describe the core campus redevelopment’s effects on the general environment, on the underlying Pootatuck Aquifer, and on the campus’s character.

The master plan also must include plans for vehicle traffic and parking, plus pedestrian circulation. That plan must show well-integrated traffic and parking schemes for the campus, as well as for the areas surrounding the campus, according to the P&Z. The master plan also must depict a core campus landscaping plan.

After eventually receiving a publicly endorsed Fairfield Hills master plan, the P&Z would have 65 days to act on it. In judging the plan’s merits, the P&Z would consider the suitability of specific proposed uses, as well as the general layout of the plan and its compliance with FHAR zoning and with the broader Town Plan of Conservation and Development.

The P&Z’s grounds for rejecting the master plan would include the master plan being inconsistent with the provisions of FHAR zoning. Other grounds for rejection would be the creation of “unreasonable congestion or traffic hazards on neighboring streets,” or the substantial impairment of property values in the neighborhood, or the creation of a health or a safety hazard for people or property on or off the campus.

Under the proposal, after the P&Z eventually approves a master plan, proposed development, including outdoor recreational and sporting fields, would be subject to the panel’s “site development plan” approval process. Individual uses on the site would need to be consistent with the campus master plan and with applicable zoning regulations.

The interior renovation and the adaptive reuse of existing buildings on the campus, which are deemed to be consistent with an approved master plan, would not be subject to the site development plan review process, according to the P&Z’s proposal.

Proposed changes to the Fairfield Hills master plan would be considered by the P&Z when such changes are sought by the town government.