Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Harmony Hill Resubdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission continues hearing on proposed 8‑lot Harmony Hill resubdivision after neighbor concerns about water, buffers and roads
Summary
An applicant seeking an 8‑lot resubdivision on Harmony Hill Road presented soils, septic testing, and a fee‑in‑lieu of open space; neighbors raised aquifer, traffic and habitat concerns and the commission left the public hearing open for town engineer and staff review.
An applicant team representing Roswell Development presented an 8‑lot resubdivision proposal for 63 Harmony Hill Road during the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting July 14; the commission continued the public hearing to allow staff and the town engineer time to review revised materials submitted late.
Engineer Tim **** described the 6.45‑acre R‑30 parcel and said soil testing by the Farmington Valley Health Department showed suitable sand and gravel for septic systems. The proposal calls for frontage lots served by private wells and septic; the applicant proposed a fee‑in‑lieu of open space using assessor values that equates to $2,941.25 per lot, and said he would secure liens to ensure payment at time of sale.
Abby Kenyon, staff, noted a prior 1987 condition that had limited the number of additional lots on the existing dead‑end street; after consulting the town attorney she advised the commission it could interpret the road as existing and consider the eight‑lot plan. Staff and the applicant also discussed streetscape buffer calculations and a request to adhere to the standard 50‑foot building line with required street trees instead of imposing the subdivision streetscape buffer that would render lots undevelopable.
Neighbors who spoke—via Zoom and in person—raised water‑supply concerns (aquifer draw and sprinkler use), pedestrian safety and sidewalks, wildlife habitat, and whether approval on the west side could set precedent for larger east‑side parcels. One commissioner recused from the matter because of ongoing professional engagements with the applicant.
Given late submissions and outstanding town‑engineer comments, the commission kept the hearing open and asked staff to provide the engineer’s review and relevant materials at the next meeting. The commission indicated it will consider any waivers or modifications, including the streetscape buffer and open‑space options, after the town engineer and staff complete their review.
