Madison Zoning Commission Sets Planning Priorities for 2017

MADISON, CT — The Planning and Zoning Commission has approved its slate of officers for 2017 and has identified several areas it wants to tackle, according to recent meeting minutes. One area of focus is on whether current regulars are hurting business especially downtown, according to meeting minutes.

The planning commission will specifically study these areas: revising sign regulations; housing as it relates to the grant and examining smaller housing options; taking a look at residential zones that could possibly be changed to commercial or transition zones; and redeveloping the floating design district, which would be of some assistance to the Academy School project, meeting minutes state.

Election of Officers. Director of Planning and Economic Development David Anderson explained that a slate of officers should be nominated, as follows, chairman, vice chairman and secretary.

Commissioner James Matteson made the motion to nominate Ronald Clark as chairman, Francine Larson as vice chairman, and Thomas Burland as secretary; it was seconded by Commissioner Joseph Bunovsky, Jr. and unanimously approved.

Vote to elect the chairman, vice chairman and secretary, as nominated, passed, 7-0-0.

Discuss planning priorities and select commission members to work with the Director of Planning & Economic Development on selected projects. Director of Planning and Economic Development David Anderson handed the commission a list of 42 items to consider as Planning and Zoning Commission Planning Priorities.

The Plan of Conservation and Development gave the Planning and Zoning Commission the role of leader on 33 of the tasks, with the remaining nine being other tasks the commission could consider revising, developing or updating in the planning and zoning regulations. Mr. Anderson suggested the commission, as a whole, decide on two tasks on which to focus, and then at least two commissioners could work with him on one of the tasks, while a second two commissioners work with him on the second task. He estimated the work would not take more than four months per topic.

Once the two topics are chosen, the small group work would take place, and then each topic, with recommended changes, would be presented to the entire Planning and Zoning Commission for input, according to Mr. Anderson.

There would be a first draft of crafted regulations, a second draft, a final draft, and then the item could be presented in a public hearing, he stated. He suggested, in reviewing the entire list, that the commissioners focus on tasks that would have the biggest impact—for instance, changing the sign regulations may not be seen as a priority, since no one in the public has really expressed problems with them.

However, reviewing the provisions of Section 26 (Housing Opportunity District) of the Zoning Regulations and evaluating whether an Incentive Housing Zone (IHZ), as authorized in Connecticut General statutes Section 8-13m, might be appropriate for Madison, are both items that are part of a Housing Grant and have a high priority, since the time period is only a year and a half to complete the process, according to Mr. Anderson.

He explained that one area to be examined is smaller housing units. As Mr. Anderson read each item on the list, he explained which tasks are already being handled by other town officials and local or state agencies and so are no longer a Planning and Zoning Commission responsibility.

Commissioners briefly discussed the 42 tasks, with some extra attention being given toward encouraging economic development, particularly in the downtown'center; whether Planning and Zoning Regulations are too stringent and hampering interest in the town; what direction to take in the area of local residents renting out their homes to travelers; whether the town should adopt regulations regarding the “clear cutting” of trees; and changing certain zones, such as some residential zones that might be better served as commercial zones.

Mr. Anderson suggested four topics and asked the commission to choose two. His topic suggestions were: revising sign regulations; housing as it relates to the grant and examining smaller housing options; taking a look at residential zones that could possibly be changed to commercial or transition zones; and redeveloping the floating design district, which would be of some assistance to the Academy School project.

After further discussion, commissioners agreed to combine the zoning change task with the floating design district task, and Commissioners Richardson, Parthasarthy, and Secretary Burland agreed to serve on that topic. Housing was also chosen as a priority task, and Commissioners Matteson, Bunovsky, and Miller agreed to serve on it