ML041910487

Plan of Preservation, Conservation, and Development

ML041910487
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	01/01/1998
From:	Sheridan T Waterford, CT
To:	Emch R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Emch R, NRR/DRIP/RLEP, 415-1590
References
-RFPFR, FOIA/PA-2005-0115
Download: ML041910487 (123)

Text

YA-NT I

I,.

n "5

,W ly-

. 9-3

,,
'7'.-

'4f.

ivt

t

I,

I 4

i..

(,itin 1

a Town of Waterford G

Planning & Zoning Commission Resolution:

Adoption of the Plan of Preservation, Conservation &

U Development G

Whereas, the Ad Hoc Plan of Conservation and Development Review a

Committee (CPDRC) was established by the First Selectman and included a a

subcommittee of the members of the Planning & Zoning Commission for the purpose of reviewing and recommending revisions to current plans and a

elements of the Plan of Development for the Town of Waterford, And, U

Whereas, the CPDRC, did conduct public hearings and workshops, a U

resident survey, interviewed public officials and developed a series of a

workbooks to form the basis for the first draft Plan of Conservation and Development.

And, a

Whereas, the Planning & Zoning Commission received the Draft Plan of U

Conservation and Development prepared by the CPDRC and did review and a

revise said document.

And, a

Whereas, the Planning & Zoning Commission did refer the draft plan to U

the State Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Long Island a

Sound Programs and the Southeastern Conneoticut Council of Governments as required by the Connecticut Coastal Management Act and incorporated c

the comments received into the Final Draft Plan of Preservation, C

Conservation and Development.

And, Whereas, the Planning & Zoning Commission did commence a public hearing c

on the Draft Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development after giving notice in The Day Newspaper on Thursday, April 30, 1998 and C

Wednesday, May 6, 1998, as required under CGS 8-23, along with other a

advertisements and letters to affected property owners.

Said hearing was opened on May 12, 1998, being continued to May 18, 1998 and June 8, C

1998 and was closed on June 8, 1998.

And, C

Whereas, the Planning & Zoning Commission incorporated many comments C

submitted by the public and public agencies at said hearing, and C

developed the final draft which also included their own preferences and knowledge of the town.

And, Q

Whereas, the Planning & Zoning Commission extends its appreciation to a

the First Selectman, CPDRC members, the public, the consultant and the a

Commission's staff for a job well done in preparing this plan to bring a

Waterford into the 21't century.

Therefore, a

Be it resolved, that the Planning & Zoning Commission on August 10, 1998 a

did adopt the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development (updated to July 15, 1998) in accordance with CGS 8-23, and establishes a

October 1, 1998 as the effective date of adoption.

a Signed-:.

G 616K a

Edi JrCairman U

Planning & Zoning Commission Q

U a

a

FIFTEEN ROPE FURRY ROAI)

WATERF.xlORxD, CT 06385-2886 August 24, 1998 To The Citizens of Waterford:

It is with a great sense of pride and gratitude that I write this letter to thank the individuals listed below for their hard work and dedication to the preparation of this Plan of Preservation, Conservation &

Development. Over the past two years, under the direction of Glen Chalder from Planimetrics, the chairmanship of John W. "Bill" Sheehan and Edwin J. Maguire, and with the able assistance of the town's professional planning staff, the following volunteers conducted numerous public meetings throughout town to develop this Plan. In addition, a scientific telephone survey, mail-in questionnaires, and numerous interviews with focus groups were also conducted to help develop this Plan:

Ad-Hoc Conservation, Planning and Development Reriew Cronmittee Planning and Zoning Commidsion Gertrud Blinderman Gertrud Blinderman Ross Lally Lawrence J. Levine Lawrence J. Levine Gwendolyn Lombardi James M. Miner, III Edwin J. Maguire, Chairman Theodore Olynciw Edward P. Pellegri, Jr.

Edward R. Pcllegri, Jr.

Michael Artis (Alt.)

Jolui W. Sheehan (Chairman)

Harold Bellucci, Jr. (Alt.)

Thomas F. Burns (Alt.)

We owe these people an enormous debt of gratitude for the fine work they have accomplished.

Simply stated, this Plan of Preservation, Conservation & Development is a blueprint for the fiuture of our town.

As stated in the Plan: "Waterford has a unique opportunity. There are few communities in Connecticut that have had the opportunity to pause at the point when they were about half-developed and consider whether to make fundamental changes in the pattern of development of the community. Most communities realized too late that there was something they wished they had done differently, but for whatever reasons they did not." The fine work of these volunteers represents the first step of implementing a new vision for our community.

We are in a unique position to implement most, if not all, of the recommendations in this Plan of Preservation, Conservation & Developmena With our financial resources, professional staff, and excellent corps of volunteers, we have the wherewithal to ensure that the good works started by the Committee and the Commission will be implemented over the next several years.

On behalf of the Board of Selectmen, and indeed, the entire community, I express sincere appreciation to the Town of Waterford's Ad Hoc Conservation, Planning and Development Review Committee and the Planning and Zoning Commission for their fine work.

Signed:

Thomas A. Sheridan First Selectman

TABLE OF CONTENTS Cover Letter Table of Contents i

ii INTRODUCTION Introduction 1

An introduction to Waterford and the Plan Executive Summary 7

An overview of the goals, policies, and recommenda-tions of the Plan CONTEXT Conditions & Trends 13 An overview of issues that influence Waterford such as history, natural resources, people, and land use STRATEGIES Community Structure An overview of the desired community structure Natural Resource Conservation Recommendations regarding conservation 25 29 35 U

Coastal Areas Recommendations regarding coastal issues Open Space Recommendations regarding open space preservation fl Housing & Residential Areas Recommendations regarding residential development and uses 41 47 ii

Business & Economic.Development Recommendations regarding business development and business uses a

Community Facilities & Services 55 63 Recommendations regarding services comunuity facilities and U

Transportation Recommendations regarding circulation 71 vehicular and pedestrian U

EU Infrastructure Recommendations regarding utilities water and public sewer Special Issues Recommendations regarding special design review and historic protection 79 such as public 85 issues such as U

Future Land Use Plan A summary of all recommendations into a future land use plan for Waterford 99 IMPLEMENTATION Implementation Tools & Schedule 103 An overview of tools available to implement the Plan and a summary of how the Plan should be implemented CONCLUSION 0

A conclusion to the planning process 117 Hii

Street Map E

N v

N E

W L

O N

D O N

N L

O N

G I

S L

A N D S O U

N D

INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION TO WATERFORD Waterford is a suburban community located in New London County in southeast Connecticut. The town is bounded by Montville to the north, by New London, Groton and Ledyard to the east, by Long Island Sound to the south, and by East Lyme to the west. According to the 1990 Census, Waterford had a population of 17,930 people within its land area of about 33.2 square miles (21,270 acres).

1

PLANS OF PRESERVATION. CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT A Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development is a tool for guiding the future growth of a community. Its purpose is to establish a common vision for the future and then to determine policies that will help attain that vision.

Since the statutory authorization to prepare a Plan is contained in Section 8-23 of the Connecticut General Statutes, perhaps the wording of that section states best what a Plan is all about:

"Such plan shall show the commission's recommendations for the most desirable use of land within the municipality for residential, recreational, commercial, industrial and other purposes and for the most desirable density of population in the several parts of the municipality."

The Plan should be viewed as outlining the future physical layout of a community as well as the means of arriving at that future layout. While the Plan is primarily a statement of recommendations addressing the physical development of a particu-lar area, it is also intended to address the social and economic development of the community.

Reasons for Preparing the Plan for Waterford Rather than allowing uncoordinated growth or change to occur, preparation of the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development:

• forms a strategy to address the future of Waterford in a positive way, enables local officials and residents to anticipate and deal constructively with the inevitable changes that occur within a community, and increases the likelihood that decisions affecting future growth will be ra-tional and reflect desired goals of Waterford residents.

Most important, conditions and trends affecting Waterford are changing. While population growth has slowed somewhat from that experienced during the 1950s and 1960s, housing growth continues. The town is also experiencing demographic changes such as an aging population and increasing school enrollments. While the community has grown accustomed to the fiscal benefits of the Millstone Power Station, these benefits are changing due to assessment practices and the deregula-tion of the utility industry.

About half of the land in Waterford has been committed to a particular use, and the other half is potentially developable in the future. How the remaining land is developed or committed (such as for open space or for economic development or for residential uses) can fundamentally change the character of Waterford.

The town is expected to continue to grow due to its shoreline location, low taxes, rural character, and physical beauty. This Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development has been prepared to help address this potential growth.

2

I.

I I.

3

Use of the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development This Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development is an advisory docu-ment. Rather than a binding document that must be followed to the letter, it is intended to provide a framework for consistent decision making.

Policies and recommendations in the Plan are meant to serve as a guide to local residents and decision makers with regard to preservation, conservation and development activi-ties in Waterford over the next decade or so.

How Was the Plan Prepared?

The process used to prepare the Plan is illustrated by the following flow chart:

I W

ERE..E -.....,.,- ----

ARE--

i-i-E: i.-i:.:-:-!-i.

R.~:-

H RE -VM A E -

'- :::--'-'i-'

ESw F 7E-

-A In. :.

E-..

l...... --E-

- -.=....................-....-

E i... A T.....-. :

Eg......

e.

I -.

In the "Where We Are" phase, a comprehensive inventory and assessment of local conditions and trends were undertaken to identify needs and issues in Waterford.

Booklets on different topical issues (listed below) were prepared for participants and compiled into workbooks. These workbooks were also available for review at the Waterford Library and at Town Hall.

Planning Workbooks Used In The Process I

Planning Primer 2

History 3

Regional Factors 4

People 5

6 Housing Economy 11 Open Space & Recreation 12 Regulatory Review 13 Transportation 14 Fiscal Overview 15 Tax Impact Analysis 16 Public Meeting 17 Goals & Objectives 18 Land Use & Development Potential 19 Telephone Survey 20 Other Surveys & Materials 7

Natural Resources 8

Coastal Issues 9

Infirastructure 10 Community Services & Facilities 4

In determining "Where We Want To Go," Waterford residents were involved in establishing a consensus on important issues through:

• public presentations that generated input and discussion,

• public forums that involved residents in planning for the future,

• a telephone survey of residents,

• write-in surveys by residents, and

• other exercises and analyses performed during the process.

5

The "How We Will Get There" phase involved many meetings of the Ad-Hoe Plan of Conservation and Development Review Committee and the Planning and Zon-ing Commission where various recommendations were discussed and refined.

The final phase, "Implementation," takes place after the Plan is adopted and the various recommendations are implemented and evaluated.

Other Relevant Information Other relevant information includes the booklets prepared during the process, previously adopted plans (such as the 1977 Plan of Development, the 1982 Mu-nicipal Coastal Program, and the Mago Point Plan), and resident surveys.

In some cases, this Plan is an update of previous plans or materials. In the case of conflict between this Plan and such other information, the recommendation of this Plan should be presumed to take precedence.

Many people were involved in the preparation of the Plan over an 18-month period. While it is not possible to name them all, the major participants are listed inside the back cover of the Plan.

6

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

MAJOR ISSUES During the preparation of this Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Develop-ment, the messages that emerged from public meetings, focus groups, telephone surveys, and questionnaires were that the pace, size, and/or type of development that was occurring in Waterford was threatening the character of the community and that residents were concerned about the cumulative impacts of this develop-ment. Consider that:

• about 89 percent of all telephone survey respondents felt that the Town should do more to preserve the rural character of Waterford,

• about 83 percent felt that the Town should continue to provide serv-ices at the neighborhood level,

• about 78 percent felt that the Town should encourage the renovation of existing buildings and properties in town,

• about 68 percent felt that the Town should control the exterior design of new buildings, and

• about 65 percent felt that the Town should acquire more land for parks and open space.

Furthermore, at public meetings on the Plan, many residents spoke passionately about the changes in Waterford and how important it was that development be compatible with community character. Residents expressed concerns about:

• the loss of rural character and open land,

• sprawling development patterns and homogeneity,

• traffic congestion and roadway improvements,

• the overall pace or scale of development in Waterford, and

• the design or layout of individual buildings or sites.

These issues transcend all other elements of the Plan. Residents appear to be frustrated that the cumulative effect of development has passed a threshold and that Waterford is in danger of becoming something different than people desire.

Town or town?

In this Plan, the word "town" is generally used to refer to the entire community while the word "Town" is gener-ally used to refer to the governmental entity.

The same general rule holds for the use of the words "state' and "State."

As a result, attention is paid in this Plan to the layout of physical areas, sites, spaces and buildings. But the attention to layout is not just about setbacks or separations or heights or other technicalities - it is about the 6verall pattern of development and efforts to guide development so that it reinforces the concept of community.

7

f Community Character Residents want areas that reflect the character of the community and that com-plement the overall structure of Waterford.

This Plan provides guide-lines for creating distinctive places that functionally and visually complement Water-ford's character.

It means creating, as well as preserving, pleasing spaces and experiences for residents and visitors. It means creating comfortable neighborhoods and villages.

It means providing for convenient business areas to meet local and regional needs.

It means providing for appropriate transitions between different areas. It means promoting excellence in design of buildings, places, neighborhoods, and the com-munity.

It means doing all of this to retain what is left of the rural character that so many residents cherish and to promote a better community and higher quality of life that residents will treasure.

Why Is This Considered So Important?

Rural Character The term "rural character" has a different meaning for everybody yet is used by residents to describe their feelings about different parts of Waterford.

For some, rural character may refer to undeveloped areas that contrast with the built areas of Waterford.

It may also refer to areas or places that make Waterford feel like a small town. For others, the term hearkens back to earlier times when Waterford was more agricul-tural.

On the other hand, the term "community character" is typically used to refer to the overall flavor or personality of Waterford.

Community character refers to residents' feelings about the built areas as well as the undeveloped

areas, the forested areas as well as the shore, the people and events in Waterford as well as the physical environment.

As the terms are described above (and used in the Plan),

rural character is a subset of community character.

Waterford is at a critical juncture in its history. About half of the land area in Waterford has been used to create the community as residents currently know it.

The work must start now if Waterford residents are to influence the future conser-vation and development of the community.

Waterford has a unique opportunity. Few communities in Connecticut have had the opportunity to pause at the point when they were about half developed and consider whether to make fundamental changes in the pattern of development of the community. Most communities realize too late that they wish they had done something differently.

Waterford residents have concluded that issues of how development is occurring are very important to them, and they are sending a message that they want things to turn out differently than they have in the past. In essence, changed conditions mandate the consideration of these issues of concern in the Plan.

8

OVERALL PLAN PHILOSOPHY During the process of preparing the Plan, the following philosophy emerged as the foundation for this Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development:

Carfuly uieth ftre d

eve5

etd~tord n odrtointl While the following goals and policies may be refined over time, it is anticipated that this overall philosophy will remain relevant during the anticipated 10- to 20-year life of this Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development.

PRIORITY ISSUES As the Waterford Plan of Conservation & Development was prepared, the follow-ing major issues were identified for the Town of Waterford to focus on during the planning period:

1. establish a Design Review Committee to review the design aspects of signifi-cant developments proposed in Waterford,

2. continue efforts aimed at protecting important natural resources and coastal

areas,

3. strive to preserve open space with special efforts devoted to providing green-belts, interconnecting open spaces, and establishing trails in order to enhance this important amenity for present and future residents,

4. strive to develop new water sources in the near future and work with surround-ing communities to develop a regional water system,.

5. undertake a comprehensive review and revision of land use regulations (zoning and subdivision, for example) in order to make them user-friendly, help im-plement the recommendations of the Plan, and address important issues.

9

Goals and Policies GOALS AND POLICIES Goals are:

general statements that describe a direction for Waterford, and on-going considerations that stay fairly constant over time.

Policies are statements of specific actions that contrib-ute to attaining the overall goal.

The following goals for the 1998 Waterford Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development were adopted. Some policies intended to achieve these goals are also presented. Additional detail is presented in the following chapters of the Plan.

Community Structure Preserve the strong village identities and the rural character that currently exist throughout the community.

Reinforce the character and diversity of individual neighborhoods within the context of what is best for the town as a whole.

Use greenbelts to define the village areas and preserve community character.

Adopt standards that address building and site design in order to en-hance the overall character of Waterford.

Natural Resource Protection Continue to preserve, protect, and enhance important natural and biological re-sources.

Continue to protect and improve the town's important fresh-water re-sources (surface water and ground water).

Preserve key scenic vistas and areas within Waterford.

Continue efforts to enhance environmental quality.

Coastal Areas Continue to preserve, protect, and enhance coastal areas that are one of the unique and defining characteristics of Waterford.

Protect the town's coastal water bodies, wetlands, fragile shoreline environment, and other important coastal resources.

Address the special needs and issues of coastal areas.

Continue to restore coastal resource areas in Waterford.

Open Space Provide for adequate open space to meet present and future needs.

Establish a coordinated open space / greenbelt system and a compre-hensive trail system in Waterford.

Set aside funds in the annual budget to acquire open space.

Encourage private ownership of open space.

10

Housing and Residential Areas Encourage a variety of appropriate housing types and densities to meet different housing needs and desires of Waterford's present and future residents.

• Provide for a diversity of housing types in Waterford.

• Make some zoning changes to address the appropriate future residen-tial development of Waterford.

• Guide the design and location of multi-family developments.

Business & Economic Development Business Triangle Promote economic development and balanced growth in order to foster local employment opportunities, maintain a favorable tax base, reduce the overall fiscal reliance on Millstone, and provide goods and services for local residents.

• Encourage compatible economic development in and direct business growth to the Business Triangle.

Make necessary infrastructure improvements and make some zoning changes to encourage appropriate economic development.

Guide the design of non-residential developments.

The term "Business Trian-gle' is used in the Plan to refer to the general area bounded by Interstate 95, Interstate 395, and Route 85.

For many years, this area was referred to as the Industrial Triangle.

Community Facilities and Services Provide adequate community services and facilities and a range of recreational opportunities to meet residents' needs.

• Address identified community facility and service needs.

Continue to monitor facility usage to anticipate future needs (such as school enrollments and recreation programs).

Use near-term fiscal resources to provide for future community facil-ity needs.

Transportation Provide for the safe and efficient movement of persons and goods through and within the town while balancing the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, vehicles, and transit.

Encourage a full range of transportation modes.

• Plan transportation improvements while balancing traffic needs with community character and environmental impacts.

• Expand and improve the network of sidewalks, trails, and walkways in Waterford.

11

Infrastructure Provide adequate infrastructure for community needs.

Develop new water supply sources.

Continue to provide sewers where needed and appropriate.

• Infiastructure should follow the land use plan.

Special Issues Establish a design review process to preserve and protect the most important elements of Waterford's community character and develop design guidelines.

Preserve the historical, archeological, and cultural features that contribute to the character and uniqueness of Waterford.

Continue to explore the possibility of inter-town and regional cooperation wher-ever this approach seems feasible and/or desirable.

Maintain local regulations and enforcement procedures to implement the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development.

Civic Triangle Undertake detailed studies of important areas (the Civic Triangle area, Mago The ten Civic Triangle" to Point, and major road corridors such as Routes 1, 32 and 85) in Waterford.

used in the Plan to refer to the general area bounded by Route 1, Route 156, and Avery Lane.

Implementation Implement the recommendations of the Plan and other programs that encourage the most appropriate development of Waterford.

• Strive to implement recommendations of the Plan in accordance with the priority suggested by the implementation schedules.

Use the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development as a basis for land use decisions by the Planning and Zoning Commission.

Review the zoning regulations, zoning map, and subdivision regula-tions and make necessary revisions.

Include important projects in the Town's Capital Improvements Pro-gram and fund them as part of the Capital Budget.

12

CONDITIONS & TRENDS HISTORY OF WATERFORD Subsistence Economy (1640 - 1850)

The first era in Waterford's written history began in the early 1600s as Dutch and English explorers and emigrants came to this area to settle and trade with local Native American tribes. The natives reportedly traded wampum (pieces of shells) for knives, hatchets, kettles, cloth, and other goods. The explorers then traded the wampum for goods elsewhere (like furs from Iroquois up the Hudson River).

Eventually, trading disagreements and skirmishes elsewhere brought conflict. In 1637, Captain John Mason attacked the Pequot Indians at Groton and inflicted much damage. With Indian concerns diminished, a land grant for the area was given by Massachusetts (1644) and permanent settlement soon began.

At first, houses were built in a compact village (then known as Pequot and re-named New London in 1658) on the west side of the Thames River. While the village soon became a bustling seaport, farming and grazing took place on com-mon lands outside the village.

About 1654, the first houses were built in West Farms (now Waterford) and plans for a mill were under way. Expanding settlement patterns created the need for a transportation network and, by 1670, roads had been laid out to the Niantic River on the west and Norwich on the north.

Agriculture was the dominant economic activity and residents traded products in New London for a variety of goods that were available at this expanding port.

People also developed other occupations (fisherman, barrelmaker, shoemaker, tanner, carpenter, shipbuilder, salt processor) to meet local needs and maintain their livelihood.

Local businesses were also established in West Farms. A granite quarry that was established at Millstone Point shipped granite all over the East Coast and the stone was used in many famous structures, including the Statue of Liberty base. Paper mills were established in the Quaker Hill area.

13

Industrial / Resort Economy (1850 - 1940)

The next era in Waterford's history was ushered in by the Industrial Revolution and the arrival of rail-roads. While some Waterford resi-dents left for economic opportunities elsewhere, they were replaced by people who wanted to work in local homes and businesses.

By 1900, about one-third of the Town's popu-lation was foreign-born or first-generation American.

At the same time, the improved accessibility of this area made Water-ford a popular shoreline and resort area.

Several impressive waterfront estates were built in Waterford during this period and summer hotels and beach-cottage colonies were created.

Many of these changes were aided by the gradual transformation from the railroad and trolley transportation system to the automobile system that occurred during the 1920s as road improvements began in earnest around that time.

An Early Quarry Worker in Waterford PhoWph povied by Robrt Nyc, Muicipl Klistoi 14

Reasons for the Formation of the Town of Waterford In 1801, Waterford became the 109th town in Connecti-cut.

The new town was formed primarily for taxation and goverment reasons.

The City of New London (formed in 1784) was more of an urban area with different interests and concerns than the outlying rural parts of the Town of New London.

Over time, West Farms residents became resentful of the lack of tax support for their school needs while being taxed for services in the City that did not benefit them (fire equipment, relief for poor, and epidemic control).

Residents of the outlying areas banded together and submitted petitions to the Legislature requesting that they be allowed to establish a separate town.

Each request was denied (1799 and 1800) before being approved in 1801.

However, the boundaries of Waterford were not finalized until 1899 when the Legisla-ture approved the annexation of about two square miles of Waterford into the City of New London Defense Economy (1940 - 1990)

While the region had always been involved in shipbuilding, the development of the diesel submarine and the onset of World War II resulted in the growth of the Electric Boat Company and the submarine base in Groton. With the onset of the Cold War, these operations geared up to meet national defense needs, and this resulted in new employment and population growth in the region. Waterford grew quickly during this period due to its location, attractiveness, and available land.

Service/Entertainment Economy The most recent era in Waterford's history began in the late 1980s with the end of the Cold War. The defense spending that had supported many of the industries and businesses in the area declined and the overall economy of the region suffered.

Then, during only a few years, the economy took a surprising turn. The Mashan-tucket Pequot Tribal Nation opened the Foxwood's Resort Casino on their reser-vation in Ledyard and it quickly became the largest casino in the Western Hemi-sphere. Shortly thereafter, the Mohegan Tribal Nation opened the Mohegan Sun Casino on their reservation in Montville as the third largest casino in the United States. Casinos are now the largest employers in the region. These new activities complement facilities (such as Mystic Seaport, Mystic Marinelife Aquarium, and the Nautilus Museum) that have long provided an entertainment component to the region's economy.

In many respects, part of the challenge of this Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development will be to set the stage for addressing:

• new regional economic influences,

• future needs of residents, and

• the appropriate future conservation and development of Waterford.

15

Important Considerations PEOPLE OF WATERFORD Year Householder Moved Into Unit (1990)

Waterford County State Sone 1970 66%

79 77 Before 1970 34%

21 23 Waterford is unique in that it has had a very stable population for many years. In 1990, due to the steadiness of the defense economy in the region (and the tax benefits from the Millstone power plant), Waterford had more "long time" house-holders than the county or the state. In addition, Waterford had more older resi-dents than the county or the state. In fact, the 1990 median age in Waterford was five to seven years older than the county or state average. How long this trend of stability will continue is unclear.

cc St%

1990 Median Age Median Age aterford 39.9 runty 32.7 ate 34*4 1990 Occupancy by Age of Householder In spite of the stable population, many changes are still occurring in Waterford.

Current residents are maturing and developing different needs and interests. This will affect land use as well as community services and facilities.

Eventually, maturing residents may leave Waterford and housing turnover will bring new residents to the community. Such changes will likely affect the demand for school facilities, recreational programs, and other services.

Population Growth in Waterford - 1810 to 2020 Under 35 35 to 54 Over 55 Water-ford 18%

37 45 State 25%

39 36 20000 15000 10000 A.

5000 0

1810 1830 1850 1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990 2010 Population Projections While representing the best information available at the time the Plan was prepared, these population projections are based on past trends that may not continue into the future.

For example, the projections extrapolate 1980 to 1990 migration trends to the year 2020.

Population Projections Recent population projections for Waterford indicate that:

• Waterford's population may decline slightly to the year 2000, and then increase an additional 10 percent by the year 2020.

Variations from these projections can occur, especially the further into the future they predict. However, evaluating these projections by age grouping can help assess the implications of change on municipal services and housing types.

Waterford Population History and Projections Actual Ages 1960 1970 1980 1990 Total 15,391 17,227 17,843 17,930 US. Caas Bureau and Poplaion Projections by Comeicu Can Data Centr Projections 2000 2010 17,860 18,630 2020 19,750 16

Population Projections by Age Groups Children (ages 0-19)

The youth population (aged 0-19) peaked in 1970 (due to the baby boom) and is expected to remain steady during the planning period if migration trends continue.

The number of adults (ages 20 to 54) increased to 1990 as the baby boom aged. If migration trends continue, these age groups are expected to decline from the year 2000 to the year 2020 due to the "baby bust."

The number of mature residents (ages 55 and over) is expected to continue to increase in Waterford as the "baby boom" ages and people live longer and more productive lives. In the year 2020, mature and elderly residents are expected to represent almost one-half of Waterford's population.

6000 1960 1980 2000 2020 Summary By Age Group Description Age Range Projection Needs Infants 0 to 4 Decline to 2010 and then increase Child care School Age 5 to 19 Peak around the year 2000 and then School facilities decline (baby boom echo)

Young Adults 20 to 34 Decline significantly in the 1990s and Rental housing and increase thereafter (baby bust) starter homes Middle Age 35 to 54 Peak around the year 2000 and decline Family programs thereafter (baby boom) and trade-up homes Mature Residents 55 and over Grow significantly to the year 2020 to Smaller homes almost half of all Waterford residents Elderly Residents 65 and over Grow significantly to the year 2020 Smaller homes and elderly programs Population by Age Group (1960-2020)

Ages 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 04 1,867 1,124 759 895 802 703 797 5-19 4,071 5,411 4,348 2,948 3,102 2,985 2,792 Subtotal 5,938 6,535 5,107 3,843 3,904 3,688 3,589 Adults (ages 20-54) 6000 40001 2000 -

4-Ages 20,34 Ages 35-54 0

1960 1980 2000 2020 20-34 35-54 2,941 2,726 3,661 3,744 4,202 4,624 4,487 4,881 Subtotal 7,143 7,350 8,148 8,625 55-64 1,116 1,759 2,208 2,143 65 +

1,194 1,583 2,380 3,319 Subtotal 2,310 3,342 4,588 5,462 2,279 2,459 2,732 5,511 5,103 4,317 7,790 7,562 7,049 2,104 2,691 3,285 4,061 4,689 5,828 6,165 7,380 9,113 Mature Residents (ages 55+)

I.,1 4UUU F

lpnnn 4-Ages &5,64 Ages65+

I.

1960 1980 2000 2020 17

Land Use Survey LAND USE IN WATERFORD The land use survey, con-ducted in the fall of 1996, was based on assessment data and field verification of certain uses. The work was done by the planning con-sultant with the assistance of Town staff.

Waterford contains approximately 21,270 acres. About 46 percent of the com-munity (9,864 acres) is either developed or the land has been committed to a specific use. Residential zones are the most prevalent zones in Waterford.

Conversely, about 54 percent of the land in town is vacant, uncommitted to a specific use, or contains enough area that it may support additional development.

Residential zones are the least developed or committed.

1996 WATERFORD LAND USE 1996 Waterford Zoning Percent of Acres Developed Land Percent of Total Land Existing Land Use Residence Zones Acres VR-7.5 150 VR-10 113 VR-15 134 R-20 3,669 R-40 4,839 RU-120 6,325 R-MF 103 C-MF 74 CT-MF 20 I-MF 193 OS 613 Subtotal 16,234 Business Zones Acres NB 41 NBPO 4

CT 181 CG 485 CR 252 WD 125 IP-3 229 IP-1 1,068 IC 151 IG 1,079 Subtotal 3,615 Roads 1,424 Total Land Area 21,272 Residential Single-family Multi-family Mobile Home, Group Home Sub Business Retail/Office Industrial Public Utility and Transmission Mixed Use 3,499 144 46 35.5%

1.5 0.5 16.4%

0.7 0.2 Itotal Subtotal Public and Institutional Uses Public Facilities Private Facilities Subtotal Public Land and Open Space Public Land Land Trust / Easement Private Open Space I Cemetery Subtotal Transportation 3,689 37.4%

17.3%

573 5.8%

2.7/o 188 1.9 0.9 600 6.1 2.8 104 1.1 0.5 1,465 14.9%

6.9%

455 4.6%

2.1%

63 0.6 0.3 518 5.3%

2.4%

1,643 16.7%

7.7%

136 1.4 0.6 989 10.0 4.6 2,768 28.1%

12.9%

1,424 14.4%

6.7%

Total Developed I Committed 9,864 100%

46.4%

Undeveloped/Uncommltted Vacant / Remaining Potential 6,535 30.7%

PA 490 Land (see Chapter 7) 4,874 22.9 Subtotal 11,416 53.6%

Total Land Area 21,273 100%

18

1996 Existing Land Use 71 K,. *-.

t

,,4/

LAN US CATEGORIES L

E I

L RESIDENTIAL Single-Family Multi-Family/Mobile Home/

Group Home BUSINESS/UTILITY Commercial/Office Manufacturing/Storage i

Public Utility Power Transmission A

Electric Generation Facility PUBLIC FACILITIES PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS Public/Private Facilities OPEN SPACE Public Land Trust/Private/Cemetary Vacant/Uncommitted Residentially zoned vacant/uncommitted land with additional development potential N

1.

t) iV G

/ I L

.-1 V

D S

(

E NV D 1

0 1 Miles cot

Development Potential DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL Future development in Waterford may occur:

• on properties that are currently vacant,

• on properties that have development potential remaining, and/or

• through redevelopment of existing parcels.

A parcel with remaining development potential could, for example, be a house on a 20-acre parcel in the R40 zone. While this parcel has a residential use on one acre, additional homes could be built on the other 19 acres in the future.

Potential By Zone Residence Yield Zones Acres (Units)

VR-7.5 45 95 VR-10 35 55 VR-15 45 50 R-20 1,195 900 R-40 3,390 1,225 RU-120 4,785 600 Os 45 0

R-MF 35 155 C-MF 5

25 CT-MF 0

0 I-MF 175 770 Total 9,755 3,875 acres units Business Yield Zones Acres (000 SF)

NB 5

20 NBPO 0

0 CT 5

10 CG 210 760 CR 50 200 WD 65 270 IP-3 20 110 IP-1 660 5,100 IC 65 3,490 IG 585 3,490 Total 1,665 13,450 acres sq. ft.

The land use survey estimated that about 11,410 acres of land in Waterford are vacant or may support additional development. These include about 4,874 acres that are currently receiving reduced assessments under Public Act 490 (assessed as farm, forest, or open space).

Residential Development Potential There is the potential for about 4,000 additional housing units in Waterford. This estimate is based on the amount of potentially developable land in the residential zones and considers zoning and development constraints (open space requirements, environmental resources, parcel configuration, efficiency losses).

No allowance has been made in this estimate for rezonings to multi-family use or possible con-version of public, semi-public, or institutional lands to development.

With about 7,600 housing units already in Waterford, there may be a total of about 12,000 housing units when Waterford is fully developed under existing zoning. At current household sizes, Waterford may eventually become a com-munity of about 30,000 people.

Business Development Potential The development potential of vacant and underdeveloped business parcels is estimated in a similar fashion. Based on reasonable yield factors, land constraints, and existing zoning, it is estimated that business zones in Waterford could result in:

an additional 1,300,000 square feet of commercial floor space, and an additional 12,200,000 square feet of industrial floor space.

FUTURE LAND USE The map on the facing page shows the current zoning map of Waterford. It has been color-coded similarly to the Land Use Map on the preceding page. If Water-ford were to be fully developed in accordance with current zoning, this map would also be a future land use map of Waterford.

However, this Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development recommends that future land use in Waterford be in accordance with the map presented in Chapter 14 - Future Land Use Plan.

20

Current Zoning E

v I

L L Mf O

N

__T m 4 4

+4,

~

Aeicn A.

as Lan5 Zoning Districts RESIDENTIAL R-MF Village Residential R-20 R-40 RU-120 m

Os COMMERCIAL C-R C-G Neighborhood Business

_wo INDUSTRIAL Industrial (IC, IG)

Industrial Park OTHER DISTRICTS WM Business/Residential C-T N

N E

IV L

0 N

D 0

N L

0 V

G I

S L

.-1 A'

D S

0 U

iV D

1 0

1 Miles

Survey Responses SURVEY RESULTS Percent of Respondents Who "Liked" That Aspect About Waterford Like Quality of Life 95%

Location 93 Seashore/Waterfront 93 Natural Beauty 91 Shopping 90 Taxes 84 Cultural Facilities 70 Town Government 64 Traffic 39 Note: Other responses were Dislike or No Opinion.

Issues that are important to Waterford residents were identified through a random sample telephone survey conducted in January 1997. Care was taken to replicate the overall population of Waterford in terms of age, gender, and neighborhood. In the survey results, the maximum margin of error for any response is plus or minus seven percent with a confidence of 95 percent.

In other words, if Waterford residents were sampled 100 times, the results would be within seven percent of those found in this survey for at least 95 sets of surveys.

Overall, residents were very satisfied with the affairs of the Town. Most respon-dents (93 percent) indicated that Waterford was a good or excellent place to live and most respondents indicated they are very happy in Waterford.

Service C!uality The quality of Town services was consistently rated good or excellent by most people. In terms of the quantity of Town services, respondents expressed the Good or greatest desire for pedestrian/bicycle facilities and programs for teenagers and Excellent no-families.

Fi, Vrvi-Ambulance Services 97 Senior Services 97 Library 96 Police Services 92 Recreation Progs.

90 Schools 85 Youth/Family Serv.

84 Parks 83 Road Conditions 75 Child Care Services 72 Note: Other responses were Poor or Fair.

Service Quantity Too Little Bicycle Paths 72%

Teenager Programs 71 Sidewalks S3 Walking Trails 50 Family Programs 30 Shoreline Access 25 Parks 25 Childrens Programs 21 Senior Programs 8

Police Services 6

Ambulance Services 2

Fire Services I

Note: Other responses were Just Right or Too Much.

More specific responses regarding functional topics are presented in the appropri-ate chapters of the Plan.

Write-In Responses When asked what was the one thing that they would like to see changed or modi-fied in Waterford, residents identified the following issues as being the three most important:

traffic, roads, transportation, sidewalks, parks, recreation, open space, and type or location of business development.

When asked what was the one thing that they would not like to see changed or modified in Waterford, residents identified the following three issues:

maintain the character, parks, recreation, open space, and fiscal, tax issues.

When asked what was the one thing that really captured the character of Water-ford, the following four issues were identified by residents:

rural character and atmosphere, coastline and seashore, quality of life, safe, attractive, quiet, good place to live, and small town personality, community feeling.

22

REGIONAL INFLUENCES In response to regional influences, Waterford has developed as a residential com-munity with a strong retail and business component.

People have chosen to live in Waterford over the years due to its convenient location relative to employment, well-regarded schools, variety of housing types, attractive environment, community attributes, and extremely low tax rate. For these reasons, residential growth in Waterford is expected to continue in the future.

Waterford has also developed as a regional business center.

Since the early 1980s, Waterford has become a major regional retail center due to Crystal Mall, other major retail uses, and supporting transportation patterns. While office and industrial growth has historically located elsewhere in the region, Waterford has a supply of properly zoned land with good access and adequate utilities for office and industrial uses. Business development is expected to continue in the future as the economy and the overall business environment dictate.

Thus, the development that occurs in Waterford in the future will be influenced by what happens in the region. Economic growth-and diversification will likely lead to future residential and business growth in the community.

Issues of Regional Concern Waterford is a member of the Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments (SECOG). SECOG has identified issues related to development trends and land use patterns in the region that affect Waterford and other communities. While Waterford cannot solve these issues by itself, it can participate in finding solutions to the following regional concerns:

• change from a manufacturing to a servicelentertainment economy,

• impacts from suburban development (sprawl) that threaten the region's natural resources,

• traffic congestion and roadway improvements that disrupt the quiet sub-urban quality of life that many enjoy or imagine,

• the capacity of utilities (water, sewer, solid waste) to support the region and allow for future growth, and

• fragmented governments and interests that restrict the region's ability to deal effectively with regional problems, 23

FISCAL ISSUES Due to the Millstone Power Plant, Waterford has the seventh largest tax base of any community in Connecticut. On a per capita basis, Waterford has the largest tax base in the state, about four times higher than the state average.

This tax base has allowed for lower tax bills, extensive infrastructure improve-ments, and enhanced services in Waterford when compared to other communities.

Waterford is ranked second in Connecticut in terms of per capita expenditures, and it is estimated that residents only pay about $0.20 in taxes for every $1.00 they receive in services.

Since the power generation equipment is considered personal property, Millstone is depreciating over time (a reduction of about $80 million of assessed value each year). For comparison, Crystal Mall is assessed at about $70 million. Even in a stable regulatory environment, tax base reduction is inevitable in Waterford - this amount of annual depreciation cannot be overcome by new economic development alone. Changes in utility regulation may accelerate these changes.

In the future, Waterford residents will be faced with decisions regarding whether to adopt an increase in taxes, a decrease in services, or both.

HISTORIC PRECEDENTS Some of the issues that have been identified in this Plan are not new. For exam-ple, Waterford's first comprehensive plan in 1952 identified, in part, the following issues:

• dispersed settlement patterns that hindered a feeling of community,

• growing reliance on automobiles due to dispersed uses,

• a road network that did not easily interconnect different areas, and

• the loss of open space.

Similarly, the 1964 Plan identified the following issues:

• making road improvements to accommodate development,

• exploring regional water resources, and

• providing open space and provide access to Long Island Sound.

The 1977 Plan was concerned with:

• preserving village identities and community character,

• establishing an open space and greenbelt system, and

• focusing economic development in certain areas.

As can be seen, some of these issues have been of concern to Waterford residents for many years. It is hoped that this Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development will be able to address these issues so that residents will be comfort-able with the future direction of Waterford.

24

COMMUNITY STRUCTURE The defining elements of Waterford's community structure are, and should con-tinue to be:

• villages in Jordan, Mago Point, Quaker Hill, and elsewhere,

• greenbelts (open space preserves or low-intensity areas) around and between developed areas,

• major dedicated business areas, and

• the Civic Triangle.

VILLAGES Reinforce the character and diversity of individual neighborhoods. One of the major goals of the 1977 Waterford Plan of Development was to preserve "the strong village identities which currently exist throughout the community." Exist-ing villages in Waterford include:

• Jordan Village (Rope Ferry Road at North Road),

• Pleasure Beach (Shore Road at Goshen Road),

• Mago Point (Niantic River Road),

• Oswegatchie (Boston Post Road at Niantic River Road),

• Ridgewood Park (Great Neck Road at Ridgewood Avenue), and

• Quaker Hill (Old Norwich Road at Old Colchester Road).

25

Input at the public forums indicated that residents liked the charm and the diver-sity of the existing villages. Residents also expressed satisfaction with recent public improvements that were made in Quaker Hill, Mago Point, and Ridgewood Park. These efforts should be continued and extended to other areas and neigh-borhoods of Waterford.

According to the current Zoning Regulations, the criteria for classifying an exist-ing area as a village residential area are that it:

1. is a stable residential area generally composed of lots smaller than 20,000 square feet in area,

2. functions as an entity,

3. has an existing, identifiable character that distinguishes it from sur-rounding development resulting from one or more factors including common density, similar building ages, sizes, and/or styles, geo-graphic features, including water, topography, and man-made barri-ers, street system, historic identification,

4. was generally developed before the present zoning regulations were enacted, and

5. does not contain large tracts of undeveloped land.

With the exception of the last two criteria, similar standards could be utilized to allow for the establishment of new village areas in appropriate areas of Waterford.

GREENBELTS Use greenbelts (undeveloped or less intensively developed areas) to define the village areas and preserve community character. Much of the present character of Waterford is defined by the undeveloped property and open space that exists in different areas. While the amount of open space will be difficult to maintain as the community grows, it is important for retaining the rural character and community character of Waterford.

MAJOR BUSINESS AREAS Continue to set areas aside for business and economic development. Water-ford has been able to provide large areas with good access and infrastructure for business and economic development. These include such areas as the Business Triangle, Millstone Point, areas along Route 1, and properties along the Thames River. These areas are generally well-suited for existing and future business and economic development.

Most existing business and economic development areas should be retained. This will also allow for the efficient management of infirstructure and traffic issues that may arise and minimize the impacts on adjacent residential areas.

26

Schematic Community Structure 4 o N

¶JrL K

I7K N E W

L O N

D O N

tvf MAGO POINT Town Center Major Economic Activity Areas Electric Generation Facility Neighborhoods/Vilages It POINT(

L O N C I S L A N D S O U N D 1

1 Miles

CIVIC TRIANGLE Continue efforts to expand the Town's land holdings in and near the Civic Triangle. Many of the Town's community facilities and activities are focused in the area around the Boston Post Road (Route 1), Rope Ferry Road (Route 156) and Avery Lane. Additional land holdings and civic facilities will help to enhance this area as a major focal point for Waterford. A detailed study is recommended in order to establish a cohesive overall vision for the Civic Triangle.

COMMUNITY CHARACTER Preserve and enhance the character of Waterford. The Planning and Zoning Commission should adopt regulations or standards that address architectural design, scale of buildings, landscaping of sites, and other features. In addition, the Town of Waterford should encourage the maintenance and improvement of build-ings and property in order to maintain community character and preserve property values.

28

NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION OVERVIEW Waterford's natural resources are highly valued by residents and contribute sig-nificantly to the character of the town.

Conservation of natural resources is therefore an important element of the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development.

By all measures, Waterford is doing a very good job of protecting its natural resources. Most natural resource protection measures are already being imple-mented, and Waterford has benefited from its strong commitment to environmen-tally sensitive land use planning and coastal management. This is evidenced by:

• good and improving environmental conditions throughout the town, considerable expertise and technological capabilities of Town staff, high quality of existing environmental plans and reports, and existing regulations that reflect concern for natural resources.

While most residents feel that Waterford is adequately protecting important re-sources, there are some refinements and enhancements that can improve upon the work already in progress.

Protection Efforts Goundwater and Aquifer Waterfot pro"et Weflands ToO Little 30%

22 Just flht 70%

75 25 65 NOte Oerxapo wwu Too Mudw 29

Resource Conservation The following tables summarize natural resources that most affect conservation and development efforts in Waterford and the map on the facing page identifies the location of minimal, modest, important, or significant conservation opportunities.

Of course, the actual development or conservation potential of a particular prop-erty should depend on detailed field investigation.

Summary of Resources Affecting Conservation and Development Resource Category Landforn Ridgelines and Hilltops Steep Slopes 15 Percent or More Soils Poorly Drained (Wetlands)

Hardpan Shallow and Rocky Excessively Drained Tidal Wetlands Salt Marshes Floodplalns Watercourse and Coast Barrier Beaches Coastline Water Quality Surface Groundwater Aquifers Water Quantity Water Quality Air Air Quality Biology Diversity Rationale for Conservation Scenic views Potential for erosion, structural concerns Habitat, water quality, and flood storage functions Groundwater impairs septic functions and buildings Impair septic function and construction Susceptible to contamination Habitat, flood storage, and water pollution filters Periodic flooding. threat to life and property Habitat, flooding, threat to life and property Protect supply watersheds, prevent pollution Protect supply watersheds, prevent pollution Provide adequate water supply Provide safe water supply Provides healthy environment Plant and animal habitat Natural Resource Summary Table Conservation Opportunity Low - Have few natural resource functions Modest - Provide some important natural re-source functions Important - Have many important natural re-source functions Significant - Provide the most important natural resource functions Development Constraint Minimal - Having only few or slight environ-mental constraints on development Moderate - Having moderate or localized severe restrictions on development that may be overcome with en-viromental plainning and mitigation Considerable - Having some severe or very severe limitations on development that may be difficult to over-come with environ-mental planning and mitigation Severe - Having only severe or very severe limitations on devel-open Resource Condition Well drained soils, less than 15% slopes Excessively drained soils Well drained soils, 15-25% slopes Well drained soils, high seasonal water table Hardpan soils, less than 15% slopes Shallow or rocky soils, less than 15% slopes Floodplain (500-year, 0.2% probability) 0 0

a Shallow or rocky soils, 15 to 25% slopes Hardpan soils, IS to 25% slopes Hardpan soils, high seasonal water table Special species, habitat, or scenic areas High groundwater availability (aquifers)

Public water supply watersheds (existing and future)

Any soil with slopes in excess of 25%

Poorly drained soils (wetlands)

Watercourses Inter-tidal resources Barrier beaches Floodplain (100-year, 1.0% probability)

Floodplain (Coastal High Hazard Zones) 30

Natural Resources Conservation Plan CONSERVATION OPPORTUN Significant M

Important

.. 1 Modest

=

Minimal WATER SUPPLY RESOURCE

/ V Public Water Supply Watersheds Potential Well Sites EM Aquifer thickness greater than 40' N

L O

N G

I S L A

N D

S O U

N D

1 0o 1 Miles C ob

ASSESSMENT & RECOMMENDATIONS The most important resource issues in Waterford are water related. Surface water and ground water resources (quantity and quality) are important because of:

an overall obligation for resource conservation and protection, the need to sustain the health of the area ecosystem, current dependence on the City of New London for public water, the need for abundant clean water for residents and businesses, and the demand for recreational and other amenities in the community.

Water Quality Continue to protect and improve the water quality throughout Waterford.

Waterford has been, and should continue to be, a leader in efforts to identify and address those activities that adversely affect water quality.

The predominant problems affecting water quality are related to land use activities that increase the nutrient and sediment content of water resources.

Specific mechanisms that the Town can implement for improving water quality include:

adopting stormwater management regulations, regular catch basin maintenance, regular street sweeping, minimum standards for stormwater treatment systems, zero net increase in runoff, zero net increase in total suspended solids, storm drain stenciling projects, and the use of best management practices such as vegetative filters.

Storm Water Quality Basin Behind Wal-Mart I

32

Coastal Water Resources Coastal Water Resources Protect the town's coastal and shoreline environment. Waterford has been recognized as being a leader in coastal resource protection and being involved in some very innovative approaches to the protection of coastal resources.

This emphasis should continue in order to protect one of Waterford's most unique and defining natural resources.

Coastal resources in Water-ford include Long Island Sound, tributary waterways (especially coves),

coastal wetlands, and fragile shore-line environments (especially barrier beaches).

Efforts to preserve and enhance coastal resources must, continue and adapt to changing conditions.

The Town should continue to consider and implement strategies to restore and protect the ecosystem, habitat, and fragile shoreline environment of Long Island Sound and tributary waterways (especially coves). In addition, the Town should continue to implement policies that will reduce hypoxia, pathogens, toxic contaminants and floatable debris in Long Island Sound.

Fresh Water Resources Fresh Water Resources Continue to protect and improve the town's important fresh water resources.

These resources are important for overall resource conservation as well as for providing sources of water supply for residents and businesses. In order to retain the ability to use water resources in the future (such as for public water supply),

the Town must protect water quality throughout Waterford.

Fresh water resources include watercourses (streams,

brooks, rivers,

ponds, lakes),

stream comdors, inland wetlands, and groundwater).

Waterford should continue participating in innovative watershed management studies (such as the current Fenger Brook, Jordan Brook, and Jordan Cove stud-ies) that have potential implications for improving water quality.

In addition, ground water and aquifer protection efforts must continue to avoid ground water contamination of the significant stratified-drift aquifers in Waterford that may provide moderate to large yields for future public water supply (such as along Jordan Brook and Nevin's Brook)..

Other efforts towards this end include:

• Aquifer areas - carefully control land uses to avoid contamination of these important ground water resources.

• Wetlands and Watercourses - continue to regulate activities that affect wetlands and watercourses.

• Hunt's Brook - ensure that any proposed diversion to Lake Konomoc for water supply is environmentally prudent.

• Jordan Brook - implement aquifer protection regulations to protect potential public supply ground water supplies.

• Lake Konomoc - control development adjacent to the reservoir to pre-vent pollution of the town's water supply.

• Millers Pond - control development upstream of the pond to prevent pollution of a recreation area and/or future water supply.

• Overall Water Quality - work with the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection to improve (such as Fenger Brook and Jor-dan Brook) and maintain water quality in Waterford.

33

Watershed Management Evaluate and manage natural resources on a watershed basis. A watershed is a drainage basin in which all water flows toward a common outlet at a lower elevation.

Watersheds provide a good basis for environmental management strategies since the outlet is a barometer of whatever activities occur in the water-shed. By completing and implementing comprehensive watershed management plans, the Town will be able to respond pro-actively to environmental and land use issues and ensure that Waterford's considerable natural resources are preserved for following generations.

Additional Natural Resource Conservation Policies Continue to honor an obligation for resource conservation and protection. As stewards of the environment for future generations, the Town and Waterford residents must ensure that important environmental assets are protected.

1. Discourage intensive development of flood-prone areas.

2. Strive to maintain a balance between use of land and the need to protect and preserve:

• natural resources that provide important functions, and

• significant natural features that enhance the aesthetic setting and qual-ity of life in Waterford.

3. Continue to strengthen efforts to enhance environmental quality by:

• considering the cumulative impacts of development activities,

• addressing situations where negative impacts have resulted,

• establishing development intensities that are consistent with the charac-ter of the land (soil types, terrain, and infrastructure capacity),

• considering areas that may be designated on the Natural Diversity Database when reviewing development proposals, and

• controlling the percentage of impervious surfaces to reduce the water quality impacts from development.

Scenic Resources Continue to identify and work to preserve key scenic vistas and scenic areas within Waterford. Natural features also provide for scenic vistas and scenic areas. Important scenic resources include hilltops and ridgelines and the entire coastline and coastal area. These and other scenic resources are highly valued by residents and should be protected while allowing for reasonable use of the specific property and the surrounding area.

34

COASTAL AREAS OVERVIEW Waterford's coastal areas are a unique resource that warrants special considera-tion in the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development.

Waterford's first Municipal Coastal Program (1982) included an inventory of coastal resources and an analysis of coastal issues. That Program set forth goals, policies and general recommendations for the coastal area and proposed regulatory amendments to balance conservation and development within the coastal area.

prsre pre4and>

-uniqe ndr de£ifining While most of the recommendations were implemented, the 1982 Municipal Coastal Program is still relevant in terms of resource identification and coastal goals and policies. As a result, the 1982 Municipal Coastal Program is incorpo-rated in this Plan by reference. In addition, the following issues and priorities are identified for continuing efforts.

Other Relevant Materials The 1982 Municipal Coastal Program (MCP) shall be considered an integral part of this Plan since the following sections are still valid:

resource identification, coastal goals, and coastal policies.

A detailed review of the implementation status of the 1982 MCP was performed as part of the process of prepar-ing this Plan. The findings and recommendations of that report can be found in Booklet 18 - Coastal Issues.

In addition, the Mago Point Study is incorporated as part of this Plan.

In the event of any conflict between those documents and this Plan, this Plan shall be presumed to take prece-dence.

35

Coastal Area Definition ASSESSMENT & RECOMMENDATIONS The coastal area includes off-shore waters and land areas within about 1000 feet of the shore.

See Connecticut General Statutes Section 22a-94 for a

complete definition.

Continue to work to protect important coastal resources.

This includes re-sources such as "the coastal waters of the state, their natural resources, related marine and wildlife habitat and adjacent shorelands, both developed and undevel-oped, that together form an integrated terrestrial and estuarine ecosystem" (Connecticut General Statutes 22a-93) and includes:

e coastal bluffs and escarpments, rocky shorefronts, beaches and dunes, tidal wetlands, coastal hazard areas, nearshore waters,

islands, shellfish concentration areas.

• intertidal flats,

• estuarine embayments,

• developed shorefront,

• offshore waters,

• shorelands, Environmental Restoration Coastal Resource Types TW Tidal Wetland EE Estuarine Embay-ment SAV Submerged Aquatic Vegetation FW Freshwater Wet-land BD Beaches and Dunes CB Cliffs and Bluffs SR Shellfish Reefs RMC Riverine Migratory Corridors F

Coastal and Island Forests G

Coastal Grasslands RI Rocky Intertidal IF Intertidal Flats Continue to restore affected coastal resource areas in Waterford. Coordination with the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection and the United States Environmental Protection Agency should continue in order to promote restoration of the following affected areas and affected resource types (defined in the margin):

Long Island Sound Restoration Areas

- Area North of Quaker Hill Alewife Cove Eastern rip - Harkness Park Goshen Cove White Point Resource Type TW EE, SAV TW EE TW Area West of Jordan Cove Millstone Point (west side)

Niantic River East of Niantic River Spit Resource Type TW FW SAV TW Continue to protect Waterford's coves. While significant improvements have been made, Waterford's coves are still affected by runoff and/or sedimentation.

Since each cove is different in terms of the specific water quality issue, reason, and response, general solutions are not possible.

In order to address these issues, the coves should continue to be monitored. The Town should institute a long range plan for all estuaries to address water quality, navigation, and sedimentation issues. As appropriate, the Town should consider the use of special zoning overlays and enhanced environmental impact reviews for activities that may affect the coves.

36

Coastal Resources N

T V

L L

E 0

3?

rj Approximate Coastal Boundary Note: The entire shoreline is considered a scenic area.

Public access is desired throughout the coastal area N

L 0

N G

I S

L A N

D S O U

N D 1

0 1 Miles "M -

l

Special Areas Continue to address the special needs and issues of coastal areas.

The Town must continue to actively participate in ongoing discussions with the State regarding the reuse of the Seaside Center. Patients have been relocated from the former mental health facility and the State is contemplating concepts regarding reuse or disposition of the facility that abuts Long Island Sound. Since this facil-ity is located in a residential area, any future use must be compatible with these constraints. In addition, provision must be made for appropriate public access to, use of, and/or ownership of the waterfront. As plans are refined, assess the exist-ing zoning and adjust, if necessary, to encourage an appropriate development plan.

The Town should strive to address the special needs of the Mago Point, Sandy Point, Pleasure Beach, and other coastal areas. These needs include:

• a special study of the Mago Point area (as recommended in Chapter 13),

addressing septic failures in the Sandy Point area (see Chapter 12),

working with the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water-ford Beach Association to minimize the potential for coastal resource im-pacts at the state boat launch and parking area at Jordan Cove.

The Town should continue to monitor activity levels at Harkness Memorial State Park. As the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection prepares to open the mansion at Harkness, the potential exists for increased utilization of the facility. The Town should continue to monitor the level and type of new activity to ensure that the conditions of the Harkness Trust are followed and that any impacts to the community or the surrounding neighborhood are addressed.

38

Public Access / Signage Improve public access to the waterfront. While Waterford has an accessible coastline and many associated recreational opportunities, these opportunities need to be improved and better identified. Waterford can obtain more access points and do more to identify existing public access points to coastal areas:

• as appropriate for the intensity of public use, and

• consistent with the capacity of the resource and the upland facilities to support a specified level of activity.

As opportunities arise and where appropriate, the Town should continue to:

• acquire, and require, public access to the Thames River, Niantic River, and Long Island Sound, and

• provide and promote access points and signage to coastal areas.

The Long Island Sound License Plate Grant Program (which supports public access and education) can be used to promote access points to coastal areas. Over time, the Town should develop a map that specifies the locations of current public access facilities.

Water-Dependent Uses Continue to encourage water-dependent activities at appropriate sites. The Connecticut Coastal Management Act (CCMA) requires that high priority and preference be given to uses that are dependent upon proximity to the water or shorelands immediately adjacent to marine and tidal waters, such as:

water-based recreational uses marinas waterfront dock and port facilities basins and channels shipyards and boat-building facilities navigation aides industrial uses dependent upon water-finfish-and shellfish-processing borne asportation plants industrial uses requiring large recreational and commercial volumes of cooling or process fishing and boating facilities water that cannot reasonably be lo-uses providing general public cated or operated at an inland site access to marine or tidal waters.

Relevant policies from the 1982 MCP related to water-dependent uses include:

• promote the development of marina and boat-launching areas on the Thames River

• encourage the maintenance and improvement of public boat-launch facilities in the town,

• promote water-dependent uses in places within the coastal area that are suitable for water-dependent development, and

• encourage waterfront and water-related commercial development and the protection of existing water-dependent uses in the Mago Point area.

39

Perceived versus Preserved OPEN SPACE DEFINITION Perceived Open Space 14,177 acres Preserved Open Space 2,768 acres Not all the land that is perceived as open space in Waterford is in fact preserved as open space. Most people tend to perceive "open space" as including all vacant land. In other words, they think "open space" is any land that is not built upon.

However, much of that land is in private ownership and subject to future develop-ment. One of the reasons that neighbors oppose new developments is over the loss of what they perceive to be open space.

While state statutes define open space as land used for recreation and conservation purposes such as agriculture, parks, natural areas, forests, fishing, wetland pres-ervation, wildlife habitat, golfing, boating, swimming, historic and scenic preser-vation, and other purposes (CGS 7-131c), this Plan defines open space as land that is preserved or dedicated to those uses, hopefully in perpetuity.

ASSESSMENT & RECOMMENDATIONS Open Space Preservation and Techniques Statutory References

'Such plan shall show the commissions recommenda-tions for the most desirable use of land within the municipality for... recrea-tional... and other pur-poses.

"Such plan may also show the commission's recommen-dation for a system of...

parks, playgrounds and other public grounds... and other purposes."

CGS 8-23 Strive to increase the amount of preserved open space in Waterford. There is no true standard of how much open space land Waterford needs. Thus, the opti-mum amount of public open space in Waterford is the amount that residents desire and the Town can afford (if purchased) or otherwise preserve (if by other means).

Even if a standard were available, it is unclear how applicable it would be to Waterford given the town's physical features and perceptions about open space.

Pursue public ownership of open space when it is appropriate. Public owner-ship may be desirable when the parcel would:

expand, improve, or contribute to the overall open space system, or provide for active or passive recreation areas, including coastal ac-cess, or provide for important trail connections.

For example, the Town should continue to explore ways to supplement existing land holdings in important areas such as near Millers Pond.

While public ownership provides the most public benefits, it is not always required for open space preservation. For example, a coordinated system of greenbelts can be established through public dedication, public acquisition, private conservation and access easements, cluster development, low-intensity zoning that preserves the greenbelt, and other techniques.

The Town should protect public lands that have been acquired for open space purposes.

In addition, parcels acquired through tax-lien foreclosures or other means that do not contribute to the open space system can be sold or traded to acquire parcels that do contribute to the open space system.

42

Strive to set aside funds in the annual budget to acquire open space. The safest measure of open space in any community is lands that are publicly owned.

Although the tax base in Waterford may be declining, public open space helps provide a community amenity and helps preserve community character.

Open space preservation is also likely to be a prudent investment, since open space has been found to improve property values and can avoid uses that have negative fiscal implications to a community.

Encourage private ownership of open space. Private open space ownership (such as the West Farms Land Trust or the Connecticut College Arboretum or conservation easements to the Town), which can preserve natural areas and pro-vide for greenbelts, may be most appropriate when:

• natural or scenic resource conservation is the primary objective,

• public access or use is not required, or

• the parcel makes no major contribution to the open space system.

Open Space Fund Section 7-131r of the Connecticut General Statutes allows a municipality to establish a Land Acquisition Fund, funded up to two mills annually, to be used for the acquisition of land for open space, recreation, or housing.

Open Space Systems and Greenbelts Establish a coordinated open space and greenbelt system. It is apparent that the configuration of the open space system in Waterford is as important to resi-dents as the amount of open space. While progress has been made over the past 20 years in preserving open space, Waterford has not established a comprehensive greenbelt system or always preserved the rural character.

The 1977 Plan of Development stated that the "major coordinating element in directing and controlling future growth within the town should be a comprehensive greenbelt system which interconnects major recreation areas with key open space preserves. Such system should follow the town's major streams and brooks to serve to protect these sensitive areas from future development pressures." In the public forums on this Plan, there was strong support for this greenbelt concept.

Acquire or preserve parcels that contribute the most to the town's open space and greenbelt system. The open space system envisaged by the Plan includes open spaces that will:

• be a major organizing element in Waterford by helping to define the villages, separate developed areas, and provide for transitions between different areas,

• interconnect different parts of town and link open spaces and neigh-borhoods by trails (pedestrian path / bikeway / hiking trail system) or "greenbelts" that are accessible to residents throughout Waterford,

• protect important natural, scenic, or other resources and improve wildlife habitat and wildlife "corridors", especially stream corridors or riparian areas along watercourses,

• increase opportunities for both active and passive uses both within the town and within the region, and

• contribute to the overall character of Waterford and to the enjoyment and quality of life for residents.

Greenbelts and Greenways A greenbelt is another word for a greenway.

A greenway is a corridor of open space that may protect natural resources, preserve scenic landscapes and historical resources or offer opportunities for recreation or non-motorized tansporta-

tion, may connect existing protected areas and provide access to the

outdoors, may be located along a defining natural feature, such as a waterway, along a man-made cor-ridor, including an un-used right-of-way, tra-ditional trail routes or historic barge canals, or may be a green space along a highway or around a village.

General Assembly Public Act 95-335 43

In order to guide future efforts, the Town should prepare a map that:

specifies the location of existing all publicly accessible open space, and differentiates between open space that is fully useable (such as public parks) and open space that is less usable (such as cemeteries or land trusts).

Trails Trail Cross-Sections Walking Trail (gravel or stonedust)

Establish a comprehensive trail system in Waterford. A trail system in open spacelgreenbelt areas (as shown on the Open Space Plan) will provide wonderful recreation opportunities for residents and provide connections between different parts of Waterford as the trail system evolves. A prototype trail could be built to generate interest and ensure that the trail design is acceptable and will be low maintenance. As the concept is refined, it will be extended and expanded to other areas.

To maximize the trail's utility, the Town should explore the potential for public access to watershed lands with the New London Water Department and make use of sewer easements, where appropriate. In addition, the Town should work with Northeast Utilities to use the power transmission line rights-of-way and easements for trail connections while recognizing that:

permission may be needed from several parties in easement areas, and

• the trails will likely be secondary to the utility transmission use.

Bicycle Trail (paved with optional walk path) 44

Open Space Plan macoke ind L

0 N

C I

S L

A N

D S

O U

N D

1 0

1 Miles AoY

Open Space Plan

• amacoke iand N

L 0

N G

I S

L A

N D

S 0

U N

D 1

0 1 Miles 77

Public Act 490 Public Act 490 The P.A. 490 program allows the Town to reduce the tax assessment for a particular property if the property is utilized as farm or forest land or is designated as eligible for open space assessment in the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development.

This program, which reduces the tax burden on these parcels, can help to defer development and maintain the amount of "perceived" open space in Waterford.

Designation of land as Public Act 490 does not mean that such land will remain as farm, forest, or open space land in the future. However, if such land is developed within 10 years of its enrollment in the program, a tax recapture provision applies.

Public Act 490 is an assessment program that helps preserve community character and "perceived" open space by:

• encouraging land owners to hold onto property and not develop it, delaying the time when the property might be developed, and prolonging the time period when the property might be acquired for open space purposes.

Continue to encourage the use assessment (PA 490) program. Farm or forest land should continue to be designated in accordance with statute. The Plan rec-ommends that any residentially zoned parcel that is more than five acres in area be eligible for the PA490 open space assessment, provided that the parcel is at least twice the minimum lot size in the zone and that the assessment is not applied to that portion of the parcel that is needed to meet the minimum lot area requirement in the zone if the parcel contains a residential use. Land that is used for business or utility purposes shall not be eligible for the PA490 open space assessment.

Encourage adoption of the Open Space Plan by the legislative body so that eligible properties can participate in the PA490 program. The Plan of Preser-vation, Conservation and Development is the first step to designation of open space land for PA 490 purposes. However, according to Section 12-107e of the Connecticut General Statutes, the open space assessment recommendation of the Plan cannot be implemented until the Open Space Plan has been adopted by the legislative body.

Other Open Space Initiatives Use available tools to encourage the preservation of open space.

Continue to implement the open space recommendations of the 1990 Recrea-tion and Open Space Master Plan.

Adopt a fee-in-lieu-of-open-space provision in the Subdivision Regulations.

State statutes provide that an applicant can offer the Commission (and the Com-mission may accept) a fee instead of providing all or some of the open space requirement on a particular parcel proposed for subdivision. This provision could be useful if the proposed open space made little contribution to the overall open space system in Waterford. The fees are placed in an account (per CGS 8-25b) that is used to acquire strategic open space parcels elsewhere in town.

Consider allowing the dedication of open space elsewhere in Waterford to meet the open space requirements of a subdivision. Similar to the fee-in-lieu provision, such a regulation would allow the Commission to accept open space elsewhere in Waterford that contributed significantly to the overall open space system.

46

HOUSING &

RESIDENTIAL AREAS OVERVIEW Waterford is a suburban community that primarily consists of owner-occupied, f

single-family dwellings. Required lot sizes for single fumily homes range from 7,500 to 200,000 square feet. Multi-family developments may be permitted at m

densities up to nine units per acre. Extensive water and sewer systems allow some ho i n d n further flexibility with regard to residential densities.

In the survey, many respondents felt that Waterford offerred too little housing for r

ps:

the elderly (smaller houses or elderly apartments), for first-time home buyers, and for renters. Most people felt that the town had too many condominiums. About G

49 percent felt that the Town was doing too little to encourage affordable housing, while about 46 percent felt that the level of effort was just about right.

The challenge of the Plan will be to maintain and promote the overall quality of Survey Results life and provide for diversity in housing choice as Waterford continues to grow and change in the fiuture.

Too Little Housing?

Rhesidential Neighborhood In Cohanzie

• Smaller homes for seiuors

• Elderly apartments

• Homes for first-time buyers

• Rental apartments Just Right?

e Single faimily homes Mobile homes Too Much Housing?

• Condominiums 47

ASSESSMENT & RECOMMENDATIONS Housing Diversity Continue to provide for a diversity of housing types in Waterford. Waterford contains many types of housing (such as single family homes, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured homes) and the survey indicated that residents support the concept of allowing a variety of residential densities and types in appropriate locations in Waterford.

Single Family Homes at Twin Lakes II Al Multi-Family Housing at Rope Ferry Commons 1 Elderly Housing AHEPA on Clark Lane Multi-Family Housing at Jordan Commons I

48

Encourage the availability of housing for a variety of age and income groups.

While house values and rental costs in Waterford are lower than the state average, housing values increased substantially throughout Connecticut and almost tripled in Waterford during the 1980s. An adequate stock of safe, sanitary housing that is affordable for a variety of age and income groups is important to the future eco-nomic vitality of Waterford and the region.

Residential Zoning Modify some residential zoning designations and regulations. These changes are needed to encourage the provision of desired housing types and the most appropriate future land use patterns in Waterford. These changes are justified in order to protect natural resources, retain the rural character that so many residents cherish, focus development in areas with infrastructure, and promote a better community and higher quality of life.

Ensure that residential development is compatible with the capabilities of the land. At the present time, except for cluster developments, the zoning regulations do not consider environmental constraints on a site as a way of determining resi-dential development yield. Rather, the Town relies on regulations that require:

• a certain percentage of land in subdivisions to be open space,

• a certain percentage of open space to be non-wetlands,

• a certain amount of road construction to provide frontage, and

• a certain area of each lot to be "buildable" (2,500 square feet if served by sewer or 30,000 square feet if served by on-site septic system).

As a result, the development plan for a property can depend more often on an applicant trying to locate as many lots as possible on a parcel than trying to design the best overallplan for the development and conservation of the parcel.

Statutory Reference "The Plan shall show the commissions recommenda-tion for the most desirable use of land within the municipality for residential.

.. purposes and for the most desirable density of popula-tion in the... parts of the municipality.

she Plan shall make provision for the develop-ment of housing opportuni-ties, including opportunities for multi-family dwellings consistent with soil types, terrain and infrastnicture capacity, for all residents of the municipality and the planning region.

"The Plan shall promote housing choice and economic diversity in housing, includ-ing housing for both low and moderate income house-holds, and encourage the development of housing which will meet the housing needs."

CGS 8-23 Adopt a developable land regulation that applies to all residential uses. Such a regulation would require the deduction of certain types of land areas (such as those suggested for conservation in the Natural Resource Conservation chapter) in all residential zones and for all types of residential development (conventional subdivision, cluster development, village-style development, and muld-family development). At the present time, Waterford only applies this type of regulation to cluster developments.

49

Consider adopting a residential density regulation. Such a regulation would establish the maximum number of units that could be built on a particular parcel.

It is a zoning regulation that applies to all residential zones and to all types of residential development (single family subdivision or cluster development, and multi-family development).

Once the maximum unit yield is determined, the applicant and the community can determine the most appropriate development pattern to preserve natural resources, be compatible with the neighborhood, pro-mote the open space/greenbelt system, and protect the rural character of the com-munity. This regulation will encourage developers to spend more time finding the best sites for homes rather than the most sites for homes.

Prior to adoption, density standards should be:

• compared to actual development experience in Waterford, and

• be reviewed to ensure design flexibility.

The density factor would:

• account for open space and road area requirements, and

• be applied after the developable land calculation has been completed.

Residential Densities Plan The map on the facing page is not intended to be a zoning map. In fact, as shown in the following table, the depicted residential densities could be achieved through a number of current zoning designa-tions.

The Residential Densities Plan on the facing page depicts the densities that might be anticipated in Waterford after consideration of natural resource constraints, open space requirements, road area, and other factors. Of course, detailed review of individual parcels, development constraints, and development proposals may result in different densities than those depicted.

Comparison of Proposed Residential Densities with Existing Zoning Designations Residential Density Categories Multi-Village Medium Low Rural Existing Family Residential Density Density Density Zones (5.o to 9.o)

(2.0 to 5.0)

(Lo to 2.5)

(0.5 to 2.0)

(o.o to 0.

EH MF VR-7.5 VR-10 VR-15 R-20 R-40 RU-120 50

Residential Densities N

i-w.4 He In 2

\\ _

=n I of Z,,

a, r}Se Ala AS Gil- \\n4 I,.

s_/

L O

N G I

S L

A N

D S O U N D

1 0o 1 Miles 01 Mi les

Eliminate the Open Space (OS) zone. The Open Space (OS) zone in Waterford is essentially a residential zone with a five-acre minimum lot size. Most properties presently designated OS are public or semi-public lands used for open space or recreational purposes. While some of these areas have significant environmental constraints, replacing the OS zone with the RU-120 will provide adequate protec-tion for these resource areas.

Eliminate combined residentiallcommercial zone designations. Waterford has several combined residential/commercial zones that make land use transitions difficult since it is unclear as to which use will be proposed in a particular area.

These areas should be reclassified to one land use category or the other, as appro-priate.

Revise the zoning along the east side of Route 85. Land along the east side of Route 85, across from the Crystal Mall, was once zoned for business uses but was changed to residential uses around the time the mall was constructed.

With the traffic characteristics of this section of the roadway, single-family residential development would be inappropriate.

More detailed recommendations for the zoning of the area on the east side of Route 85 between Interstate 95 and Interstate 395 are presented in Chapter 13 - Special Issues.

Village Residential Development Extend the Village Residential zone to other neighborhoods that meet regula-tory criteria. In several neighborhoods in Waterford, the prevailing lot sizes are smaller than are required and are non-conforming under the existing zoning (such as Morningside, Route I at the New London city line, and on Route 85 south of Interstate 95). While some neighborhoods in the coastal area were rezoned to Village Residential following the 1982 Coastal Plan, zones were not changed in neighborhoods outside of the coastal zone.

These areas should be considered for the Village Residential zoning districts. In establishing Village Residential zones in these areas, the appropriate lot size designation should be based on the average size of existing lots in these areas.

Consider limited expansion of existing Village Residential zones.

In order to preserve and enhance existing village areas, limited expansion of the Village Residential zones should be considered where the proposed development:

is adjacent to existing village development, will enhance the village character and identity, has public water and public sewer available, will not encroach upon or adversely impact sensitive natural resource areas, and preserves open space in this or other areas of Waterford to offset the higher density.

52

Consider allowing new Village Residential zones to be established under certain conditions. Proposals for village residential development in new areas could be considered by the Commission if-

• the proposed site is adequately served by infrastructure,

• the proposed plan preserves a significant amount of open space, and

• the development yield does not increase the overall density in the community.

For an assemblage of 100 acres, for example, it may be more beneficial to locate 70 homes on 30 acres (with 70 acres of open space) rather than 70 homes on 70 acres (with 30 acres of open space). Such a decision, however, will depend on the location and circumstances of the parcel and the proposed development.

Jordan Village

-/1-7 Ridgewood Park 53

Multi-Family Developments Guide the design and locations of multi-family developments. In the telephone survey and the public forums on the Plan, residents indicated that the design of apartment or condominium developments should be more carefully controlled to ensure compatibility with community character. Residents were most comfortable with residential projects that exhibited predominantly single-family appearance and characteristics.

As a result, some sort of design review process for multi-family uses is recommended. See Chapter 13 for more specific recommendations.

Residents felt that locational guidelines for multi-family developments would be helpful. After discussion and refinement, it was determined that a location may be considered appropriate for multi-family development if-

• adequate infrastructure (road and utility) is available,

• the proposed density is in character with surrounding development, and

• the overall design is compatible with the character of the community and/or the neighborhood.

Stoneheights Condominium Elderly Housing on Yorkshire Drive Housing Improvement and Maintenance Encourage the maintenance and improvement of housing units and neighbor-hoods in Waterford. The Town should consider establishing a program to assist lower income families improve their housing units and neighborhoods. Such a program could be administered through low-interest loans or grants. While federal and state programs are available, Waterford may not be eligible or competitive due to local demographic, economic, or fiscal parameters. On the other hand, the Town can establish a similar program itself.

Consider adopting an anti-blight ordinance. Such an ordinance would provide standards for the maintenance of property and provide for enforcement proce-dures. Examples of similar ordinances should be studied for possible options most applicable to Waterford.

54

BUSINESS & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OVERVIEW Economic development includes retail, service, office, industrial, utility, and other land uses that:

provide employment for residents, furnish goods and services, and

• enhance the local tax base.

m*sf prom ote Mlan deconomtd divelopmehtil* rder

ofasfeH64?aIem- 'i ploymentpnazntarn a avoraMe 

bas4 rediue the overall

se4 rdiance on'>

MiI!ston4 zndpro.<.

i4de g.rod i*ndew

cesfor re4dnts



Due to overall economic conditions, little office or industrial development has occurred in Waterford in some time (with the exception of Sonalysts). On the other hand, retail development in the town has accelerated. Major retail uses that have developed in the past five years include Walmart, Bl's Wholesale Club, Home Depot, and Shaw's Supermarket.

Sonalysts Studios In Waterford 55

Survey Results In the survey, most residents felt that Waterford had too few manufacturing busi-nesses.

People generally liked the amount of tourist attractions, offices, and warehouses. There was less support for more retail stores or supermarkets.

Too Little?

Manufacturing Just Right?

Tourist attractions Offices Warehouses Retail stores Supermarkets While residents favored limiting business development to areas where it already exists, there was support for more retail development on Route 85 and Cross Road. Few residents were in favor of additional retail development on Route 1.

Residents also favored efforts to improve the appearance of business uses in Waterford.

Statement Agree Disagree The Town should limit business development to areas where it currently exists.

78° 22%

The Town should encourage the renovation of existing properties in towrL 77 23 The Town should control the exterior design of new buildings 68 32 Recycling businesses should be relocated from Miner Lane to the Interstate 95 area.

64 36 The Town should allow more retail development on Route 85.

59 41 The Town should allow more retail development at Cross Road / Interstate 95.

57 43 The Town should allow more retail development on Route 1.

26 74 Most people felt generally comfortable with the level of effort expended by the Town in the area of economic development. While more might be done to promote tourism, most people felt that the Town was doing the right amount to expand the tax base and encourage economic development.

Crystal Mall and Home Depot 56

Millstone Power Station ASSESSMENT & RECOMMENDATIONS Economic Development Efforts Continue efforts to encourage economic development in Waterford. The regional economy is changing from advanced technology to tourism and enter-tainment. As a result, the demand for office and industrial uses has been lower than anticipated. At the same time, Waterford has become the focus of retail uses in the region and this trend can be expected to continue.

With increased competition to attract office and industrial uses, Waterford's strategic location, excellent infirtructure system (roads and utilities), low prop-erty taxes, and progressive regulations may not be enough to attract such eco-nomic development.

However, through the continued efforts of the Economic Development Commis-sion, elected and appointed officials, and stafl the Town can continue to attract new businesses to Waterford. But the Town must devote time and energy to making such efforts work. Such efforts should continue to be coordinated with regional economic development agencies.

57

Make necessary infrastructure improvements to encourage appropriate business development. To enhance the economic vitality of Waterford's business areas, the Town should make, or require, necessary infrastructure improvements appropriate to each area. The Town should ensure that adequate traffic capacity and levels of service are provided and preserved in major business areas. The Town should encourage shared driveways and parking and should strive to reduce the number of curb cuts. In addition, the Town should enhance the economic vitality of Waterford's neighborhood commercial areas by establishing community parking lots and making parking, landscaping, signage, and/or bicycle and pedes-trian improvements, where appropriate.

This overall strategy will serve to limit adverse impacts that can be caused by business uses (noise, lighting, traffic) by minimizing locations of strip develop-ment and relating the business scale to the character of the neighborhood and needs of the town.

Retail Cluster at Cross Road 58

AnPropriate Types and Locations Encourage economic development of types and in locations that are compati-ble with community character. To protect and enhance community character, the Town should encourage future commercial activity in three separate and distinct areas:

• the regional business areas adjacent to the major highways,

• areas on state roads where businesses have located to date, and small business areas for meeting neighborhood needs.

These areas are generally located and configured to limit adverse impacts (visual, noise, traffic, hours of operation) that can be caused by business uses. The Town needs to carefully manage locations of strip commercial development. Retail uses should be sited to be compatible with the community and minimize negative visual, traffic, and other impacts. The Town should consider implementing special permit controls for certain types of business development (such as large retail stores).

In addition, the Town should:

• strive to prevent the abandonment of existing retail stores as new business activity occurs elsewhere,

• encourage the reuse of vacant buildings, and

• discourage the rezoning of land for retail uses where adequate zoned land already exists.

Direct business growth to the Business Triangle. Most future business growth (retail, office, industrial) should be directed to the Business Triangle where water and sewer systems can accommodate such growth and where traffic will not impact existing residential neighborhoods. Since office and industrial development may take some time due to economic trends, the Town should resist efforts during the planning period to add additional retail uses unless the proposed retail devel-opment:

• is in an appropriate location,

• meets clearly identified needs in the community, and will not hinder the appropriate development of the Business Triangle.

59

Statutory Reference Business Zoning and Uses "The Plan shall show the conunission's recommenda-tion for the most desirable use of land within the municipality for... com-mercial, industrial,..

. and other purposes."

"The Plan shall be a state-ment of policies, goals and standards for the physical and economic development of the municipality..."

CGS 8-23 Modify some business zoning designations and regulations. Waterford cur-rently has many more types of business zones than it needs. The Town can im-plement the recommendations of the Plan and encourage compatible economic development by eliminating or combining some non-residential zoning categories.

The Town should eliminate combined residential/commercial zone designations.

Undertake a comprehensive review of the business zones and regulations.

Such review should include:

• a detailed zone-by-zone analysis of the regulations to determine the most appropriate zoning categories to retain,

• a detailed use analysis of each zone to determine what uses should be permitted as-of-right and which uses should be allowed by special permit, and

• a detailed zone-by-zone analysis of the zoning map to determine whether the existing zoning boundaries are appropriate in the field.

In addition, the Town should develop appropriate standards to adequately address home occupations (professional uses, business services, personal services, and contractors).

Change some of the business zoning districts. In the telephone survey and during public forums, residents wanted to discourage additional retail development along Route 1 and encourage economic development in the Business Triangle. To accomplish these objectives, several business zones should be altered in order to:

more appropriately use natural resource transitions, limit the amount of development in areas with less convenient access,

• complement the proposed greenbelt system,

• preserve residential areas adjacent to arterial corridors, or

• be more compatible with community character.

Some specific changes to be considered include:

reviewing the zoning around the Waterford Speedbowl and possibly regulating such a use (and reasonable accessory uses) as a special permit in exchange for property improvements, reviewing the Industrial zone at the end of Industrial Drive, moving the western edge of the Business Triangle to the middle of the wetland system, creating a Neighborhood Business - Professional Office (NBPO) zone along Route 85 south of Interstate 95, and reducing the size of the Industrial zone east of Millstone and west of Gardiner's Wood Road while not precluding its use as aprt of the electric generating facility.

While the Plan shows reducing the business zone depth along Route 1 east of Miner Avenue, in certain situations it may be advantageous to retain the business zoning if access management techniques are used to improve access control and provide other community benefits.

60

Business and Economic Development Plan MVI L

L E

i L

O N G I

S L

A N

D S O U

N D

1 0

1 Miles

Revise the zoning along the east side of Route 85. Land along the east side of Route 85, across from the Crystal Mall, was once zoned for business uses but was changed to residential uses around 1977. With the current traffic characteristics of this section of the roadway, single-family residential development would be inappropriate. More detailed recommendations for land use and zoning on the east side of Route 85 between Interstates 95 and 395 are presented in Chapter 13.

Consider allowing compatible small businesses in the Village Residential districts. Small-scale business uses, such as an office or a small "general store" serving only the immediate neighborhood, may enhance some of the village areas in Waterford. Such small-scale uses might be considered as a home occupation or permitted as a special permit in a Village Residential zone, provided that:

the site is appropriately located (such as on a major street),

the use is well controlled and is compatible with the village character, any non-office meets an identifiable need in the village and is devoted to only serving the needs of the adjacent neighborhood, strict floor area limitations and design guidelines are adopted.

Consider adopting regulations to allow bed-and-breakfast establishments in residential zones.

Such uses can, in appropriate locations and with reasonable controls, enhance the character of Waterford and provide opportunities to maintain historic structures or further other purposes of the Plan.

Design Review Process Establish a design review process for any non-residential development.

Ac-cording to the survey and public forums, residents are concerned about the size and scale of recent developments (especially Shaw's and Home Depot). A Design Review Committee would be a positive step in terms of integrating such develop-ment into the community and ensuring community compatibility. Design review is discussed in more detail in Chapter 13.

Shaw's Supermarket on Route I I

62

COMMUNITY SERVICES

& FACILITIES OVERVIEW Community services (such as education, public works, public safety, social, and recreation) contribute significantly to Waterford's character and quality of life.

This Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development reviews the physical aspects of such services (and their facilities) to ensure that they are appropriately located and sized to meet community needs during the planning period and beyond.

Historically, Waterford has tended to deliver many services at the neighborhood level. Examples of this include neighborhood schools, neighborhood fire stations, and recreation facilities.

In the survey, residents indicated that they were satisfied with the current quality and quantity of Town services. Residents favored the provision of education and recreation services at the neighborhood level. On the other hand, residents desired some local community facilities and services.

Community Facilities Statement AgpC Education and rec-93%

reation services should be provided at the neighborhood level.

The Town should encourage more options for child care.

The Town should build a community center for all ages.

The Town should develop a municipal golf course.

he Town should spend less money on education.

81%

74%

45%

19%/0 63

ASSESSMENT & RECOMMENDATIONS General Facilities Continue to improve the Civic Triangle. This can be accomplished by acquiring additional land in the area, installing sidewalks, and interconnecting parking areas in order to establish this area as a community park and town government office center. This will increase the efficiency and utilization of existing areas and allow for future facility expansion and improvements.

A special study of the Civic Triangle with preparation of an overall master plan is recommended.

Address identified community facility and service needs. During the planning period, the Town should address the following identified community facility needs:

Town Hall Continue to address space needs for the Assessor's office and for storage. Make driveway improvements at Rope Ferry Road to improve access Library Integrate circulation/ parking in the Civic Triangle to increase parking and allow for future expansion of the Library Fire Department / Emergency Medical Consider building improvements to provide community meeting spaces at the fire stations 64

HaI 6 Public Works Relocate police firing range elsewhere on site and consider relocating non-public works uses elsewhere in town to address site Constraints and storage needs Parks and Recreation Consider relocating Parks and Recreation activities away from the Senior Cen-ter/Public Works facility to address use conflicts (space, noise, parking, access, and location)

Senior Citizens Consider relocation away from Senior Center/Public Works facility to address use conflicts (space, noise, parking, access, and location)

Solid Waste / Recycling Possibly consider privatizing solid waste and recycling operations in the future.

Consider moving the transfer station to the Interstate 95 area once the landfill is closed Youth Services Bureau Consider providing a paved recreation space for safe outdoor play Monitor and address evolving community needs as welL Other community facility needs may evolve during the planning period and need to be addressed. In order to anticipate such needs, community service and facility usage and condition should be monitored. For example, the Town should monitor use of the senior bus due to the increasing elderly population and make service adjustments as neces-sary.

65

Education Facilities Continue to monitor and project school enrollments. While adequate capacity exists in current school facilities for present enrollments and projected enrollments through to the year 20034, demographic changes will continue to occur. School enrollments and school capacity should continue to be carefully monitored during the planning period in order to most efficiently use existing educational space and to project future enrollment changes well before they occur.

Waterford School Facilities School 1996-97 Max.

Site Area Type School Grades Enrolled Capacity (Expansion Potential)

Elementary Cohanzie K-5 274 346 4.5 ac. (None)

Great Neck K-5 281 330 5.9 ac. (None unless acquire adjacent land)

Oswegatchie K-5 303 338 22.5 ac. (Yes)

Quaker Hill K-5 200 264 15.2 ac. (Difficult due to recreation uses)

Southwest K-5 256 350 20.6 ac. (Building configura-tion complicates expansion)

Middle Clark Lane 6-8 673 1,034 43.8 ac. (Limited)

High Waterford High 9-12 702 1,163 65.4 ac. (Limited unless PK/HS 82 acquire adjacent land)

TOTAL 2,689 3,825 Historic and Projected School Enrollments by Grade 1973 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 Consider the long-term enrollment potential. If Waterford becomes a com-munity of 30,000 people with school enrollment between 15 and 20 percent of the population, the Town may eventually need a school system to accommodate more than 5,000 students. Future expansion areas or new school sites that may be needed to accommodate enrollments in the distant future should be acquired as soon as possible.

66

Plan school facilities for maximum efficiency and flexibility. The Town should begin to identify and acquire sites now for future school needs. The Town should continue to promote the use of existing and future school sites for recreation.

Finally, the Town should plan school buildings that will provide for fluctuating enrollments or programmatic needs that are expected in the future.

Continue to use school facilities, wherever possible, for recreation and com-munity needs. Residents have benefited from cooperation between the Recreation and Parks Department and the Board of Education that

• takes advantage of the substantial public investment in schools, and

• provides high quality recreation facilities at the neighborhood level.

67

Recreation Facilities Continue to provide adequate public recreation facilities.

As shown in the following table, Waterford residents are generally well served with facilities managed by the Recreation and Parks Department. The Town must continue to monitor recreation usage in order to provide for recreational needs. The Town must also:

• consider the distribution of recreational facilities (some neighbor-hoods have less recreational facilities than others),

continue to provide for small, neighborhood recreation areas and parks in existing and new developments,

• evaluate the types of recreational facilities (active/passive) that are provided on existing land holdings in order to most efficiently manage these facilities and provide needed facilities (including trails),

• adjust the type of recreational facilities and programs to respond to the changing age distribution of Waterford residents, and continue to implement the recommendations of the 1990 Recreation and Open Space Master Plan.

Recreational Facility Assessment Number of Type of Existing Immediate Future Activity Type of Facility Facilities Need Need Baseball Baseball Fields 5

Possible Softball Fields 8

Little League Fields 10 Court Sports Basketball Courts 10 Tennis Courts 15 Possible Field Activities Football Fields 2

Soccer Fields 6

Possible Running Track I

Upgrade Possible Gen. Purpose Fields I

Indoor Activity Gymnasiums 5

At schools Outdoor Activity Open Play Areas 3

Play Equipment 9

Picnic Areas 6

Possible Aquatic Activities Indoor Swim Pool I

Ponds/Lakes/Beaches 7

Ice Skating Areas 4

Miscellaneous Golf Course (9-hole) 0 Possible Volleyball 1

3 4

Maintain the quantity and quality of existing recreational facilities. Recreation facilities must be maintained in terms of:

• the quantity of facilities (Waterford cannot afford to lose the use of existing recreational facilities such as those on Gardiner's Wood Road that are leased from Northeast Utilities on a year-to-year basis), and

• the quality of facilities (in tenns of field rotation, maintenance, and equipment).

68

Community Facilities Plan 4

\\

\\

\\t a

\\

\\

\\1

\\

\\'

\\'

\\

\\

\\

e

\\

i

')

\\

\\

Q 0

\\

\\

vn

\\

\\

\\

.e

^

\\

8 W^tvord Municlp

\\

,4Cowplex

\\

f X \\1 t-:,

\\'

)

\\E f__

o o

\\

,-/

f X,0'

\\!

/,

\\

0 S

S

----

w 000 S

' :S '

Lf

h.

u -

t U

-U.:,

v w OX

. :{

d; \\

9F, S

-0 '

sg A-

e.

s d -

sa \\:

Ibmn \\

P - (

\\X.:

q \\

1:'

_E.:

^

t

vE i

EA..i; E

50slcSc s tchb JX &bool..3 J sA

- rr rlosblhn I +

j



>v__

\\ i h

\\

v r 1 k F

Existing Active Recreation C-tz /

k w- '

jK x.

Ijl Jr

1.

s l

, \\,\\

t 1

Possible Future Active Recreation V X 0

V

/ I N

L 0

,V G I

S L

A N

D S O U

N D

1 0

1 Miles L-2"o7

Plan for anticipated community recreation needs. During the planning period, the Town should consider providing a community center in a central location to accommodate recreation and senior activities and reduce conflicts at the existing complex. An existing school building may be appropriate.

Continue to encourage non-public recreational opportunities, where appro-priate. This includes commercial ventures (such as movie theaters or sports facilities) as well as active and passive recreation activities that are available at several private and semi-private facilities in Waterford (such as Connecticut College Arboretum, New London Country Club, West Farms Land Trust proper-ties, several beach associations, and New London watershed lands).

Football Practice at Waterford High School Fiscal Considerations Plan now for future community facility needs.

Given the planned gradual depreciation of taxable value at the Millstone facility, the Town must anticipate future facility needs well in advance in order to:

• ensure that the best sites for community facilities are available,

• acquire sites in the most cost-effective and efficient manner,

• program development of public facilities over a period of years, and

• ensure that facilities are commensurate with the town's ability to pay.

Strive to use near-term fiscal resources to provide for future community facility needs. Waterford is fortunate at the present time in that the Millstone facility provides significant fiscal benefits to the community. However, as previ-ously indicated, this facility is being depreciated over time and will provide less tax revenue in the future. The fiscal reliance on Millstone is both an asset and a liability. The Town should set money aside for future community facility needs through a five-year Capital Improvement Program that matches community facil-ity needs with available resources.

70

TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW This element of the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development is con-cerned with the means by which people and goods are moved from one place to another. It is designed to encourage, support, and serve the current and desired future land use pattern for Waterford.

In the preparation of this element, it is anticipated that reliance on the automobile will continue for the foreseeable future, traffic volumes will continue to escalate, public transportation will continue to play only a minor role in the region, and that interest will continue to grow for pedestrian and bicycle improvements.

In the survey, residents were strongly in favor of sidewalks in new residential developments and maintaining current street widths. Yet, residents also wanted to do more to preserve the rural character of Waterford. Past experience in Water-ford has also shown that residents are concerned about the impacts on residential neighborhoods that have resulted from the widening, extension, and connection of existing roads. As a result, the major issues of concern in Waterford are the roadway circulation system and recreational modes (such as pedestrian ways and bicycle paths).

Circulation Statement Amft The Town should 89%

do more to preserve the rural character of Waterford.

The Town should require sidewalks in all new residen-tial developments.

The Town should build more major connecting roads.

The Town should stop plowing side-walks in Waterford.

The Town should allow for narrower road widths on residential streets.

74%

32%

30%

22%

71

ASSESSMENT & RECOMMENDATIONS Existin! Roadway Network Maintain the best features of the existing transportation system.

Balance traffic needs with community character and environmental impacts.

While roads occupy less than seven percent of Waterford's land area, they are sometimes treated as if they are the most important part of the community. While snow plowing and emergency access are important, the Town must strike an appropriate balance among traffic needs, neighborhood needs, and community needs. The Town also needs to consider how roadways affect wetlands and water-courses and Long Island Sound.

Reevaluate road design standards and road classifications. If the Town is to preserve community character, local road standards must reevaluated to:

focus less on criteria that emphasize moving traffic, and focus more on criteria that create functional and scenic roads that provide, where appropriate, for pedestrian and bicycle traffic and on-street parking.

The existing hierarchy of roads in Waterford appears reasonable given the charac-teristics of the community. Still, when the Commission adopts new road design criteria, existing road classifications should be reviewed at that time. The Town must strive to find the right balance between through traffic and property access on all roads. This review will help ensure that the road network is appropriate for the level of adjacent development and overall circulation patterns in Waterford.

Great Neck Road 72

Preserve the capacity of existing roadways. Increasing traffic volumes typically result in increased congestion and accidents, especially in commercial areas. To minimize these problems, the Town should use access management concepts (limitations on the number and/or location of curb cuts) to preserve roadway capacity in appropriate areas. This is particularly evident on Routes 1, 32, and 85 and detailed access management studies of these roads should be conducted.

Access Management Detailed access management plans would help balance economic development, traffic

capacity, property

access, and community character by guiding the location and number of curb cuts along roads such as:

• Route I (east of Avery Lane),

• Route 85 (from New London to Interstate 395), and

• Route 32 (particularly near Richard's Grove Road).

Level of Service Strive to maintain adequate traffic service levels. Where development propos-als may create traffic impacts, developers should be required to document and mitigate the traffic impacts of proposed developments. The Town should strive to maintain a Level of Service (LOS) standard of C or better on roads. Exceptions could be allowed on commercial corridors to allow a lower level of service (such as D or E) so long as the additional congestion occurs only on private driveways.

The Town must remain vigilant that fiuture signal modifications or adjustments do not erode the LOS on the main roadway.

Level of Service C refers to a traffic engineering situation of stable flow where volumes are between 70 and 80 percent of capacity and delays at traffic signals are between 15 and 25 seconds.

Road Improvements Plan improvements to provide for future traffic needs. A major challenge facing Waterford is to provide for adequate vehicular circulation now and in the future given the historic and anticipated growth of traffic volumes, congestion, and accidents. With only about half of the land area in Waterford developed, traffic volumes in the future will surely be higher due to traffic from within and without Waterford.

Make improvements that are warranted to reduce accidents.

The Town should continue to monitor areas with accident concentrations in order to identify whether accidents are related to operator error or roadway design. Where neces-sary, the Town or the State should make improvements that will reduce the num-ber and/or severity of accidents where road design is a contributing factor.

73

Work with the Connecticut Department of Transportation to complete impor-tant projects. The following list identifies State projects that are necessary to improve the local transportation system and to direct and encourage development in accordance with the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development:

1. Build a new on-ramp from Route 85 southbound to Interstate 95 northbound that:

connects to the New London frontage road, thereby increasing the ca-pacity of the ramp and eliminating conflicting movements on Inter-state 95, and reduces congestion on Route 85 by providing either a double left-turn lane or a right-turn "cloverleaf' on-ramp.

2. Extend Parkway North and Parkway South easterly to connect to Route 85 and the frontage roads in New London.

3. Replace the Cross Road bridge over Interstate 95 with a six-lane bridge.

4. Make improvements on those sections of Route 85 that are north of Interstate 395 and south of Interstate 95 and provide left-turn lanes, where needed, be-tween Interstate 95 and Interstate 395.

Interstate 95 and the Proposed 74

5. Make intersection improvements on Route I (especially at Niantic River Road and at Cross Road).

6. Widen westbound Route 156 to two lanes from Route 1 to Avery Lane to minimize traffic conflicts between intersecting and merging traffic.

7. Construct a northbound off-ramp from Interstate 395 to Route 693 (Route 32 connector) in Quaker Hill.

8. Construct a fill intersection at Routes 32 and 693 rather than a merged exit ramp.

9. To protect the neighborhoods along Route 32, make improvements such as:

• connect side roads along Route 32 to Richard's Grove Road to pro-vide safer access to the traffic signal on Route 32,

• install a light at Fitzgerald Avenue,

• provide pedestrian overpasses or tunnels, and

• provide sidewalks or inter-connecting trails, where appropriate.

10. Complete Route 11 from Salem to an Interstate 395/Interstate 95 interchange with associated widening of Interstate 95 from the interchange to the New London City line with a minimum of three lanes each direction.

Route 32 at Richard's Grove Road 75

The Town must also complete important projects that are its responsibility The following priority list identifies Town projects that are necessary to improve the local transportation system and to direct and encourage development in accor-dance with the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development:

1. Improve Douglas Lane to eliminate poor horizontal alignment (sharp curves).

2. Improve Niantic River Road and install sidewalks in conjunction with sewer installation.

Niantic River Road Ensure that important future road connections are made.

As Waterford continues to grow, the need for additional traffic routes will become more pro-nounced for trips by residents and emergency service response. If such routes are not identified as part of the Plan, implementation will become more difficult in the future when their need is more apparent. Road connections may be made as part of future development plans by private developers or in conjunction with major public projects by the Town of Waterford and cout'include:

1. Additional roads parallel to Cross Road to provide alternative traffic routes between southern and northern Waterford, such as:

extending Niantic River Road northerly to South Frontage Road, extending Clark Lane from Fog Plain Road to the extended Parkway South near Mary Street and Gilead Road.

2.

Connections between Vauxhall Street Extension and Bloomingdale Road.

In most cases, it will be preferable to require a developer to construct a road connection at the time of development. However, in some situations, it may be preferable to reserve the road right-of-way as part of a development plan so that the option of whether or not to build a connecting road can be determined at some time in the future. If neither option is pursued, the Town runs the risk of not being able to establish road connections that may be needed in the future. This strategy can also be pursued for road connections that are not identified in the Plan.

76

Transportation Plan L O N

G I

S L A N

D S O U N D

1 0

1 Miles t

O ?'

A

Pedestrian and Bicycle Travel Expand and improve the network of sidewalks, trails, and walkways in Wa-terford. The remaining links in the sidewalk network (as shown in the Sidewalk Master Plan) should be completed in order to connect various parts of town.

Other opportunities can be explored for walks and trails on the greenway network proposed in the Open Space Plan and in areas of future road connections. The State should make pedestrian improvements in the Route 32 corridor due to high traffic volumes and the lack of crosswalks, especially at the Route 693 connector.

Encourage and provide bikeways in town. Bikeways should be provided along major Town roads and in greenbelts. In addition, the State should establish bicy-cle lanes along highways.

Bikeway facilities should be enhanced by installing appropriate signage and crossings where needed.

Reevaluate the sidewalk maintenance policy.

While sidewalks are currently maintained by the Town, this policy may need to be reevaluated for some or all sidewalks during the planning period as more sidewalks are built and fiscal cir-cumstances change.

Other Transportation Issues Encourage a full range of transportation modes and improvements. Bus, rail, and air services are also important in providing mobility for residents and busi-nesses. Efforts during the planning period should be devoted toward encouraging:

rail service, carpooling, vanpooling, mass transit and other transpor-tation alternatives, and creation of a transit netvork designed to connect residential areas with shopping areas, employment centers, and recreational facilities.

During the planning period, the Department of Transportation should expand the commuter parking lot at Route 85 and Interstate 395 and establish commuter parking lots in the vicinity of:

Route 32 and Route 693, Route I and Niantic River Road, and Clark Lane and Route 1.

During the planning period, the Department of Transportation should improve safety for at-grade railroad crossings (such as Miner Lane) with an overpass or an effective alternative such as a controlled gate system.

Locally, the Town should:

monitor the need to expand the senior dial-a-ride service since demand should increase as the elderly population grows, and study the need for a transportation program for youths (in conjunction with, or separate from, the senior dial-a-ride service) so that youths may take advantage of programs and activities intended to benefit them.

78

INFRASTRUCTURE OVERVIEW The Plan considers the location and capacity of infrastructure services (such as public water, public sewer, electric, telephone, natural gas, and cable comnimunica-tions) since these services can strongly influence development patterns.

ASSESSMENT & RECOMMENDATIONS Public Water Service While much of Waterford is presently served by public water supply, most of the water supply for the system is provided by the City of New London. Water comes from the Lake Konomoc reservoir located in Waterford and Montville.

There are several issues of concern to Waterford. First, state standards indicate that there may not be an adequate margin of safety between average water con-sumption and the safe yield of the system. As a result, additional supply sources will be needed in the future.

Second, the intermunicipal agreement with New London provides that new Waterford customers may be denied service in times of water shortage. In other words, the future development of Waterford could be restricted by the inadequate safe yield of the water supply system.

The survey found that four of five Waterford residents support efforts to develop new water supply sources.

Encourage water conservation. Regardless of whether additional water supplies can be developed, Waterford residents should strive to reduce their current water consumption and waste.

The Town should encourage water conservation for residential, conmnercial, industrial, and other uses by whatever means are avail-able.

Water Supply Adequacy Safe yield of a water system is the amount of water that can be safely withdrawn, even in a drought year.

State standards conclude that an adequate margin of safety exists when:

safe yield is more than 125 percent of the aver-age consumption, or average consumption is less than 80 percent of the safe yield.

New London Water System MGD Consumption 5.71 Safe Yield 7.00 MOD is mllion pompa Ptday Margin of Safety MOS Consumption/Yield 82%

Yield/Consumption 123%

79

Identify and develop new water supply sources. If an adequate supply of water for Waterford residents and businesses is to be provided, the Town must continue to investigate and develop new water sources on a timely basis. While diversion to Lake Konomoc would make use of the existing filtration equipment there, Water-ford has concerns regarding potential environmental impacts the diversion might have on Hunt's Brook. Limited study has been done regarding the possibility of pumping water from Miller's Pond back to Lake Konomoc.

Ground water sources have also been investigated in the Jordan Brook and Nevin's Brook water-sheds by the Town of Waterford. While New London and Waterford are both investigating additional water sources, specific action steps need to be taken to address this issue. The challenge will be to have new water supply sources avail-able in a timely manner.

Encourage the creation of a regional water system. Mention has been made of the potential for a regional water supply that would result from interconnecting the Norwich, Groton, and New London/Waterford systems. Such a system would provide for additional safe yield and redundant supply sources. The first step could be the interconnection of the Norwich system in Montville with the New London/Waterford system in Quaker Hill. This possibility should be studied and implemented on a regional basis.

80

Water Service Areas This map represents those areas that have public water available L

O N G I

S L

A N

D S O U

N D

1 0

1 Miles I

0 1Mes

Public Sewer Service After an extensive sewer construction program during the past 10 years, much of Waterford is presently served by public sewer. Sewage treatment is provided by the City of New London through an inter-local agreement.

There is adequate capacity at the sewage treatment plant for the needs of Waterford's present and anticipated future users. If needed, the plant can be upgraded.

Continue to provide sewers where needed and appropriate. While sewers have been installed in many areas of Waterford, there are some other areas where sewers may be desirable during the planning period to abate pollution, encourage economic development, or other purposes. Some areas (such as Sandy Point) may be more appropriate for on-site septic corrections or community septic systems.

Any sewer extensions should:

meet identified needs,

• be in accordance with the sewerage master plan, and

• support the recommendations of this Plan of Preservation, Conserva-tion and Development.

As previously indicated, the Town must ensure that any sewer extensions are not used to change the land use pattern in ways that are incompatible with the recom-mendations of the Plan.

82

Sewer Service Areas This map represents those areas hat have public sewer available L

O N G I

S L

A N D S O U N D

1 0

1 Miles

Other Utilities Natural gas is available in parts of Quaker Hill and the major commercial areas of Waterford.

Wired utilities (electric, telephone, and cable communications) are generally available to serve new development.

Consider other utility improvements as well.

Cable utilities (electric, telephone, cable communications) should be placed under-ground in new developments and as road reconstruction occurs in other areas.

To encourage economic development and to best meet the needs of local residents and businesses, the Town should encourage a program of continual improvement of

• electric service and reliability, and

• communications service and capacity.

The Town should continue to carefully review the evolution of telecommunications technology (such as cellular communications from towers) in order to provide for the reasonable needs of residents and businesses while considering the overall impact on the community.

The Town should continue to encourage the extension of natural gas. This in-cludes the possible extension of natural gas to Millstone Power Station in the event that the plant converts to alternative forms of power generation in the future.

Community Structure Infrastructure should follow the land use plan. The availability of public water and/or public sewer service can influence development density and patterns.

However, if this happens, it can be a case where the "tail" (infrastructure) is wagging the "dog" (the overall community structure). The Town must not let this happen. Therefore, it is the philosophy of the Town of Waterford to ensure that the infrastructure system supports, but does not dictate, the local zoning scheme or Future Land Use Plan.

In support of this philosophy, it should be the policy of the Town of Waterford:

• not to extend sewers to areas where low density residential development is desired unless necessary for public health reasons.

• to limit development intensity in accordance with the capabilities of the land to support additional development in areas where both public water and sewer systems are not available.

84

SPECIAL ISSUES DESIGN REVIEW From the survey and the public forums on the Plan, residents clearly expressed concerns over the adverse impact that some major developments have had on community character. Further discussion revealed that the issue was related to most non-residential buildings and to multi-family residential projects. Residents felt that some type of design review process for these types of uses was needed in Waterford.

It is almost impossible to draft absolute standards for design that are adaptable to all uses, zones, and. situations in Waterford and that will provide meaningful guidance to a prospective applicant in the design of a proposal for a specific site.

If it were this easy, it would have been done already.

What is needed in Waterford is a relative standard that varies over time and by location in the community yet provides input and guidance with regard to design issues as part of the application review process.

The best way to provide this is through an advisory design review committee that can discuss design issues with an applicant and send a report to the Commission to be considered along with all of the other relevant information on an application.

The Committee's report to the Planning and Zoning Commission would be advi-sors only so that the Commission can consider that input as part of the applica-tion. The Committee should be formed by the Commission and appointments should be made by the Commission.

Issues that the Committee should consider and address include:

mt*st s<:::

ta s

to prsreszdpo

ec h m.::.:

sss,,o.,i.:st B impor-,g~s Site Design appropriate site layout appropriate building location parking location pedestrian improvements landscaping sense of entry appropriate site access Building Design overall architectural design scale, massing, height, cadence entry location platform height architectural style roof shapes, building details quality and color of materials relationship to abutting buildings relationship to streetscape improvement to the area 85

Design Review "The concept of the public welfare is broad and inclu-sive...

"The values it represents are spiritual as well as physical, aesthetic as well as mone-tary.

"It is within the power of the legislature to determine that the community should be beautiful as well as healthy, spacious as well as clean, well-balanced as well as carefully patrolled..."

Berman v Parker US. Supreme Court (1954)

Each proposal needs to be evaluated in relation to:

• the other uses and buildings that surround the proposed site,

• the existing or desired character of the area,

• the types of natural, cultural, or historic resources that exist,

• the ability to share parking or access,

• the need for specialized buffering, and

• the relation of a building to the street, the pedestrian environment, and the overall streetscape.

Over time, the Committee should develop design principles related to its findings, observations, and experience with regard to particular locations and areas in order to provide as much guidance to applicants and the Commission as possible. Other communities that have managed to establish design guidelines have found that they work well in educating applicants about what the community seeks in the design of new projects.

Summary of Recommendations

1. An Advisory Design Review Committee should be established to advise the Planning and Zoning Commission on design issues. The charge of the Advi-sory Design Review Committee would be to review the design aspects of proj-ects submitted to them.

2. An advisory report from the Committee to the Commission would be required for:

large scale residential uses (such as apartments or condominiums),

• most non-residential uses, special permit applications, and

• any other application referred by the Commission.

3. The Committee should meet regularly in order to review and discuss proposals and formulate advisory recommendations.

4. Informal discussions should be encouraged.

5. The Zoning Regulations should be modified to incorporate the Advisory Design Review Committee referral and report into the application process.

6. The Committee should also receive professional staff advice from the Town.

86

HISTORIC PRESERVATION While most Waterford residents felt that the Town is doing the right amount to protect historic structures, more than one-quarter of residents felt that more could i

d be done.ot; 1

Property IdentificationlStudies - Perhaps the most fundamental step to preserv-ing historic assets is to identify historic resources in the community. The recent uniqes Historic and Architectural Survey of Waterford (1997) and the proposed archeo-logical survey (1998) should be the starting point for placing a greater emphasis on historic preservation in Waterford. Based on these surveys, nominations to the State andfor National Register of Historic Places should be pursued.

The map and tables on the following pages identify historically significant re-sources in Waterford.

Local Organization Resources Encourage the historic preservation activities of local Jordan Schoolhouse at Historic Jordan Green resources such as:

local organizations (such as the Waterford.

r 7W_

Historical Society, Inc., Friends of Harkness, and the West Farms Land Trust and the Goshen Conservancy) that are involved in historic preservation, and local staff resources such as Waterford's Mu-nicipal Historian who can maintain local min-formation and assist in historic preservation.

StatelLocal Programs Encourage the use of other programs that can help in preserving historic resources, such as:

• an historic review board to ensure the architec-tural compatibility of proposed building im-provements in designated historic areas, the Design Review Committee to consider the architectural compatibility of proposed build-ing improvements in other sensitive areas,

• an historic district overlay zone that estab-lishes additional zoning requirements in areas with historically significant resources, and

• recognition as having a Certified Local Gov-ernment program for historic preservation (which opens up opportunities for grants and other assistance programs).

87

Additional Information]

NATIONAL HISTORIC DISTRICTS Additional information on historic resources in Water-ford can be obtained from:

• Waterford Library,

• the Municipal Historian,

• the Waterford Historical Society, Inc.,

• 'Historic and Architec-tural Survey of Water-ford (northern party), and

• "Historic and Architec-tural Survey of Water-ford (southern part)".

A.

Jordan Village Historic District (Rope Ferry Road and vicinity)

Residential village that developed at the head of Jordan Cove. Settlement dates to 1720 with expansion after construction of the First Baptist Church (1848). Includes a portion of Civic Triangle with Historical Society buildings.

NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES Listings on the National Register are also on the State Register of Historic Places.

1.

"Seaside" (Shore Road)

A waterfront estate on Great Neck overlooking Long Island Sound. Was used as a tubercu-losis sanatorium (the first of its kind in the United States) in 1930s, 1940s and 1950s. Then used as a state mental health facility until 1 990s. Currently being considered for reuse.

2.

Harkness Memorial State Park (Great Neck Road)

One of the most complete, grand-scale, sea-side estates in Connecticut Former estate of the Harkness family, includes a 42-room mansion built in early 1900s. Now a State Park with summer concerts and site of Camp Harkness, a summer camp for the handicapped.

88

Historic Preservation

[

National Register of Historic Places E

Sites that may be eligible for te National Register of Historic Places Districts that may be eligible for te National Register of Historic Places N

jLCO N G I S L A N D S O U N D

I 0

1 Miles R__

RECOMMENDATIONS FROM HISTORICAL AND ARCECTURAL SURVEYS Areas That May Be Eligible as National Historic Districts Great Neck Road and Shore Road (46 properties) -

a concentration of significant properties ranging from earliest settlement to the twentieth century.

Shore Road Estates (12 properties) - a concentration of multi-acre estates along Shore Road and New Shore Road built from the 1890s to the 1930s.

Pleasure Beach (46 properties) - a sumnmer cottage colony on Jordan'Cove and Long Island Sound developed from the 1880s to the 1920s.

Graniteville (21 properties) -

a nineteenth century cluster along Rope Ferry Road between Logger Hill and Durfey Hill, homes of quarry workers.

Riverside Beach - the best preserved concentration of 1920s to 1930s. middle-class shore cottages along the Niantic River.

Oswegatchie (28 properties) -

a concentration of turn-of-the-century upper-class summer homes on Sandy Point.

Gurley Road I Oil Mill Road (10 properties) - a cluster developed around an early mill site on the upper reaches of the Niantic River.

Best View (12 properties) - a turn-of-the-century residential cluster on Smith Cove, inspired by the opening of an electric railway between New London and Norwich.

Quaker HIll (34 properties) - a hamlet in northern Waterford with sites and struc-tures representing 250 years of settlement Rosemary Lane (6 properties) - a cluster of six International-Style residences grouped around a pond.

Buildings and Sites That May Be Eligible for the National Reeister of Historic Places 24 Avery Lane 465 Boston Post Road 19 East Neck Road 58 Gallup Lane 33 Great Neck Road 21 Gurley Road 4 Jordan Cove Circle 11 Magonk Point Road 63 Rock Ridge Road 314 Rope Ferry Road 317 Rope Ferry Road 334 Rope Ferry Road 28 Seventh Avenue 16 and 30 Douglas Lane 908 Hartford Turnpike 1077 Hartford Turnpike 1144 Hartford Turnpike 1214 Hartford Turnpike 33 Lower Bartlett Road 413 Mohegan Avenue Parkway 65 Upper Bartlett Road 51 Way Hill Road 168 Waterford Parkway North 94 Great Neck Road 6 Goshen Road Rose house (and Puppet Theater)

Matthew Stewart house Nathaniel S. Perkins house Joshua Moore house Trurnan-Darrow house James Rogers house Millstone School Chapman-Mackenzie farm Camp View Motel J. E. Beckwith house Douglas(s)-Morgan farm Whipple farm Holt farm Lakes Pond Baptist Church Morgan store Austin Perry house James Rogers farmhouse Bolles house Walter Chappel house MorganlDistrict 8 School Gertrude Bezanson home Great Neck School 90

Summary of Recommendations With the following measures, historic resources that help define Waterford's character will be preserved for future generations:

1. Encourage local organizations to be active in historic preservation. Encourage efforts of the Waterford Historical Society to study Waterford's history and preserve endangered and important historic properties. Maintain a municipal historian to collect, maintain, and coordinate local historic information. En-courage the Town to be recognized as having a Certified Local Government Program for historic protection and be eligible to receive training and funding from the State Historical Commission.

2. Encourage nominations of buildings and districts to the State and/or National Register of Historic Places. Support establishing Historic District(s) that pre-serve the character and essential elements of an area and that are supported by a majority of residents. Consider establishing a historic district overlay zone with additional zoning requirements criteria in areas with historically signifi-cant resources.

3. Utilize the time period allowed in the demolition delay ordinance (up to 90 days) to identify, review, and preserve potentially significant cultural re-sources. Where existing historic resources proposed for demolition cannot be preserved, undertake efforts to document their important features.

4. Encourage preservation of existing resources in order to maintain and enhance community character (zoning incentives, adaptive re-use, possible flexibility with non-conforming uses). Review the zoning and subdivision regulations to ensure that the regulations provide:

for flexibility and incentive to preserve historic properties, adaptive reuse of historically significant structures, and

• a basis for considering historic factors in land use decisions.

5. Promote awareness of state and federal government assistance programs that provide tax credits and incentives for the rehabilitation of historic buildings.

6. Encourage new development to be architecturally compatible with the historic character of the adjacent village and the community. Seek to retain aspects of Waterford's rich historical heritage in new development, such as keeping stone walls and barns in new subdivisions.

7. Continue efforts to document cultural and archeological resources, especially as part of new development.

91

ROUTE 85 The east side of Route 85, between Interstate 95 and Interstate 395, is an area deserving of special attention in this Plan. With the development of Crystal Mall and other commercial uses along Route 85 and the widening of the roadway, the conditions that exist along the east side of Route 85 are not considered conducive to single-family residential development, as much of the area is now zoned. As a result, the Plan recommends that appropriate commercial uses be allowed in this area (as illustrated on the map on the facing page).

East Side of Route 85 It is necessary to provide a buffer between the Business Triangle and residential areas to the east. Rather than have Route 85 be the separation between the commercial and residential uses as it is cur-rently, this new scheme will allow for lower intensity commercial uses along the east side of Route 85 with a significant buffer provided between these uses and the residential areas to the east.

M M

l In some areas, natural re-sources (such as steep slopes or wetlands) will provide this buffer.

In other areas, smaller scale and lower i

intensity commercial uses in conjunction with existing natural resources and signifi-cant planted buffers will provide for a reasonable transition between the com-mercial area along Route 85

-f-and the residential areas to I

the rear.

I i

The natural features in the corridor provide little opportunity for cross connections between the development pockets. Stringent access controls will be desirable in order to maintain the traffic capacity of Route 85 as a result of any development.

The map on the facing page identifies the types of land use constraints that exist in the study corridor (inland wetlands, steep slopes, power transmission lines) and suggests land uses that are considered most appropriate for particular areas.

92

Rte. 85 Business District Detail

\\

/,*

Land Use Transition Edge/Buffer Location Power Transmission Areas Severe Development Constraints Development Pockets M

CG M

NBPO

=l SDD Zones Uses A

Retain CG Zone or equivalent Office, Retail, Lodging l

B Rezone from IG to CG Office, Retail, Lodging C

Rezone to RU-120 D

Rezone to SDD to allow Lodging, Sit-down restaurant, Office uses restaurants-and-lodgingfacilitles 2

Retain CG Zone or equivalent Office, Retail, Lodging i l Sit-down restaurants and smaller retail F

Rezone from R-40 and CG to SDD I establishments in front; office uses, lodging,

_. asistedA'ujng ornlmiytJnAlherear_

G Rezone from R-40 to SIDD Office, Lodging, Assisted Living H

Rezone from CG to NBPO Small Professional Offices

Route 85 Recommendations

1. Consider establishing a Special Development District (SDD) or a new zone along the east side of Route 85 where lower intensity commercial uses (such as office, multi-family residential, or other suggested uses) would be allowed by special permit, provided an appropriate buffer to adjacent residential areas is maintained.

2. Proposed land uses should be required to share access so that no new openings in median dividers on Route 85 are allowed unless for a public road serving multiple properties at an appropriate location where a traffic signal can be provided. Adequate turning lanes should also be provided at any proposed intersection.

3. To encourage this result, the new district should require:

• a special permit for any new or expanded curb cut, and large lot frontages, unless waived by a special permit, so that land cannot be subdivided into individual lots with many driveways.

94

OTHER SPECIAL STUDIES Civic Triangle As discussed elsewhere in the Plan, the Town should undertake a special study of the Civic Triangle and surrounding area in order to:

• reinforce the civic focus of the area,

• establish an overall pedestrian and vehicular circulation pattern, identify desirable properties for acquisition or locations for new uses,

• expand or enhance existing facilities (including recreation), and create a hannonious overall plan that integrates all of the uses and functions in the area.

Mago Point Mago Point is a unique place. It is the only area in Waterford with a concentra-tion of water-dependent uses and it attracts many visitors to the blend of restau-rant, recreation, maina, and fishing charter operations located there. So that it continues to evolve in a positive way, a detailed study of the Mago Point area should be performed in order to reinforce the waterfront village concept and enhance its vitality.

As part of the study, the Town should investigate ways to reinforce the waterfront village character and attract customers and visitors to this area. Small "festival marketplace or waterfront theme activities might complement the uses already in place. In addition, the Town should continue public improvements in the area, particularly with regard to streetscaping and removal of utility poles on the old Rope Ferry Road.

Corridor Studies The Town should undertake studies of land use and transportation issues along major road corridors in Waterford. These studies should include appropriate land uses, appropriate transitions, access management, and property maintenance and improvement. While the entire corridor is important in each case, special attention should be devoted to the portion of:

• Route 1, east of Rope Ferry Road,

• Route 32, south ofthe interchange for Route 395, and Route 85, south of Interstate 395.

Summary of Recommendations

1. The Town should undertake a special study of the Civic Triangle area.

2. The Town should update the 1985 Mago Point Study.

3. The Town should undertake special studies of Routes 1, 32 and 85.

95

We nmst con 5nuet0 explore ilzpe#xsibzhy ofnfer-towa and reg*rna

eratioi

wher.ver this ap-.

jfr6dskfeds14(e aaWorteswabt>e44 REGIONAL RELATIONSHIPS The Town should continue to work with other towns in the region and with the State of Connecticut and other agencies to explore opportunities where interests coincide.

Summary of Recommendations

1. Continue to work cooperatively with other municipalities in areas of common interest (such as water supply, sewage disposal, watershed protection).

2. Continue to work cooperatively with regional economic development agencies.

3. Coordinate with appropriate programs and efforts of regional planning agen-cies.

96

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Local land use regulations (particularly zoning and subdivision regulations) are the primary tool for implementing the recommendations of the Plan. If the Town is to implement the many recommendations that residents have indicated that they favor and that are in the best interests of Waterford today and in the future, then these regulations must be updated and maintained.

Summary of Recommendations

1. Maintain a combined Planning and Zoning Commission in order to most efficiently administer land use policies of the Town.

local regulations and zdures.to. limpl emenit i don, conservation; andDevlmn...2

2. Update local regulations to implement the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development and maintain regulations that are easy to understand and use, yet are effective in guiding development.

3. Maintain adequate inspection and enforcement staff and procedures to ensure compliance with the regulations.

4. Encourage and facilitate education and training of land use Commission members and staff in areas relevant to their official responsibilities. Investi-gate bringing training opportunities to the Town as well as attending sessions elsewhere.

5. Establish an efficient process and desirable timetables for staff comments with regard to:

• preliminary plan reviews, and

• formal applications.

6. Continue to develop materials that describe the application review process for applicants and the general public.

97

Future Land Use Plan Open Space Existing Open Space

-0 Natural Resources Desired Open Space Residential Multi Family Village Residential O

Medium Density Low Density

[=

Lowest Density Business Regional Business X

Community Business Neighborhood Business Industnal

=

Waterfront Development N

L O

N G

I S

L A

N D

S O U N D

1 0

1 Miles C'

FUTURE LAND USE PLAN OVERVIEW The recommendations of each of the preceding chapters can be combined to present an overall Future Land Use Plan for Waterford.

The Future Land Use Plan, presented on the facing page, is a reflection of the stated goals, objectives, and recommendations of the Plan as well as an integration of the preceding elements of the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Develop-ment.

In essence, the Future Land Use Plan is a statement of what the Waterford of tomorrow should look like.

DESCRIPTIONS OF FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES Open Space Existing Open Space Natural Resources Desired Open Space Areas that ame owned by public and private agencies and are preserved or used for open space purposes.

Areas that exhibit significant environmental constraints (wetlands, watercourses, steep slopes, floodplains, and coastal resource areas ) and that represent the highest priorities for conservation. Use of these areas should be generally restricted or discouraged. These areas should not be used to calculate development density.

Areas that contain sensitive resources and/or would make a significant contribution to Waterfords open space network and greenbelt system.

99

Residential Multi-Family Village Residential Medium Density Low Density Lowest Density Areas that are used or intended for higher density multi-family development and where the density of development is expected to exceed five units per acre, but not more that eight units per acre, unless a project addresses special needs housing.

Areas that have developed historically with smaller lots established prior to zoning. The overall density of develop-ment is expected to occur between two and five units per acre.

Areas adjacent to village residential development and other areas served now or in the future with public sewers and with limited constraints to development Residential development is expected to occur at a density between one and two units per acre.

Areas that may or may not have infiastructure available where due to sensitive natural resources, infiasucture limitations or desirable patterns of development, typical density of about one unit per acre would be expected.

Extension of sewers into these areas is discouraged.

Areas not intended to be served by public sewer or water and where residential development is expected to occur at densities less that one unit per three acres, due to environ-mental and /or access constraints and desired development patterns.

Business Regional Business Community Business Neighborhood Business Industrial Areas located on or near major intestates and arterial roads and served with adequate infrastructure that have developed or are intended to develop with business facilities of various sizes and scales that will primarily serve regional needs.

Areas located on or near major arterial roads and served with adequate infrastucture that have developed or are intended to develop with business facilities that will pri-marily serve community needs Areas that have developed or are intended to develop with small-scale business facilities that will primarily serve neighborhood needs and/or be compatible with the site location.

Areas located on or near arterial and interstate roads, railroad lines and water-access points and served with adequate infirtructure that have developed or are intended to develop with industrial and office facilities.

Waterfront Development Land located in coastal areas that is particularly suited for water-dependent uses (uses that require a waterfront location). Related uses may be appropriate provided they do not displace an existing or potential water-dependent use and are not located on the waterfront 100

Other Land Uses Electric Generation Facility Power Transmission Existing Active Recreation School Sites lThe area presently devoted to use by the Millstone Power Station and associated facilities necessary for the generation and transmission of electricity.

Areas presently used for major power transmission lines including future related uses.

These corridors present opportunities to establish a trail system throughout Water-ford.

Areas that presently contain active recreation facilities.

Areas that presently contain local educational facilities.

Civic Triangle The area that is intended to remain as the commumity focal point (the Sown Green of Waterford") and the location of major public facilities.

PLAN CONSISTENCY This Plan was compared with the Locational Guide Map in the 1998-2003 State Plan of Conservation and Development and found to be generally consistent with that Plan. Any inconsistencies can be generally attributed to:

• the scale of the mapping, differences in definitions of desirable uses or development densities, or

• local (as opposed to State) desires about how Waterford should grow and change in the coming years.

In addition, this Plan was compared with the 1997 Regional Plan of Development for the Southeast Connecticut Council of Governments and found to be generally consistent with that Plan. Any inconsistencies also can be generally attributed to:

• the scale of the mapping, or differences in definitions of desirable uses or development densities, or

• local (as opposed to regional) perspectives about desirable fiuture land use patterns in Waterford.

101

102

IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS & SCHEDULE Many of the recommendations in the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development can be implemented by the Planning and Zoning Commission through zoning amendments, application reviews, and other means. The Com-mission has the primary responsibility of implementing the Plan's recommenda-tions.

Other recommendations require the cooperation of, and actions by, other local boards and commissions such as the Board of Selectmen, Board of Finance, and similar agencies. However, if the Plan is to be successfully realized, it must serve as a guide to all residents, applicants, agencies, and individuals interested in the orderly growth of Waterford.

TOOLS Several tools are available to implement the Plan's recommendations. These tools can influence the pattern, character, and timing of future development in Water-ford - either public or private - so that development is consistent with and pro-motes the goals, objectives, policies, and recommendations of the Plan of Preser-vation, Conservation and Development.

The tools available to the Commission include:

• the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development,

• Land use regulations, Capital Improvements Program, and referral of municipal improvements (CGS 8-24).

Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development Using the Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development as a basis for land use decisions by the Planning and Zoning Commission will help accomplish the goals and objectives of the Plan. All land use proposals should be measured and evaluated in terms ofthe Plan and its various elements.

103

Land Use Regulations The zoning and the subdivision Regulations provide specific criteria for land development at the time of applications. As a result, these regulations are impor-tant tools to implement the recommendations of the Plan. However, this is only true if the regulations reflect the recommendations of the Plan.

In the near fiture, the Planning and Zoning Commission should undertake a comprehensive review of the zoning regulations, zoning map, and subdivision regulations and make whatever revisions are necessary to:

• make the regulations more user-friendly,

• implement Plan recommendations, and

• promote consistency between the Plan and the regulations.

Capital Improvement Program The Capital Improvement Program (or Capital Budget) is a tool for planning major capital expenditures of a municipality so that local needs can be identified and prioritized within local fiscal constraints that may exist.

The Plan contains several proposals (such as land acquisition or community facility development) whose implementation may require the expenditure of Town funds.

The Plan recommends that these (and other) items be included in the Town's Capital Improvements Program and that funding for them be included as part of the Capital Budget.

Referral of Municipal Improvements Section 8-24 of the Connecticut General Statutes requires that municipal im-provements (defined in the statute) be referred to the Planning and Zoning Com-mission for a report before any local action is taken. A proposal disapproved by the Commission can only be implemented after a two-thirds vote by the Represen-tative Town Meeting. All local boards and agencies should be notified of Section 8-24 and its mandatory nature so that proposals can be considered and prepared in compliance with its requirements.

SCHEDULE Implementation of the Plan is a gradual and continual process. While some rec-ommendations can be carried out in a relatively short period of time, others may only be realized toward the end of the planning period, and some may be even more long-term in nature (beyond the end of the planning period). Further, since some recommendations may involve additional study or a commitment of fiscal resources, their implementation may take place over several years or occur in stages.

The charts on the following pages assign primary responsibilities and preliminary schedules to the Plan recommendations.

104

Legend

• ,g.

P R

1 Toig 4xber Villazes Reinforce the character and diver-25 l l

cmt sity of individual neighborhoods.

I I 'I I

Greenbelts Use greenbelts to define the village 26 C j M

F areas and preserve community Major Business Areas Continue to set areas aside for 26 I

business and economic develop_

m ent.

RPC Recitn & Parb HMC HarborManagmen SSAC Seaside Adv. Com EDC Eoonomic Dcvel.

BOE Board of Educaion FEC Flodf ionCoa Res.

Residents Civic Trianzle Continue efforts to expand the 28 Town's land holdings in and near the Civic Triangle.

Communit Character Preserve and enhance the character 28 of Waterford.

I 105

Legend

.. a.- -.....

M MM:

MMUj.

?L.]

.T' j..

TOWI  UtheA

Water Ouality 1OF Board of Finance RPC Recreation & Padc HMC Harbor Mauagemerd SSAC Seaside Adv. Com.

EDC Economi DeveL BOX Board of Education FEC Flood

/Enkiou Cod Rev Residerft Continue to protect and improve 32

~ ~ I r 2.~

water quality throughout Waterfbrd.

Coastal Water Resources Protect the town's coastal andl 33 A

ce l

M shoreline environment.

l Fresh Water Resources Continue to protect the Town's 33 important fresh water resources.

Watershed Management Evaluate and manage natural red 34 e t a j

1 sources on a watershed basis.

l l

L Additional Natural Resource Conser Continue to honor an obligation for resource conservation and protec-tion.

I Scenic Resources Continue to identify and work to preserve key scenic vistas and scenic areas within Waterford.

34 106

a:

130S To%i oUer

• ':*""'""':.*""*--"'*-'"*"**'

Overall Continue to work to protect impor-36 tant coastal resources.

Environmental Restoration Continue to restore afcted coastal 36 resource areas in Waterford.

Continue to protect Waterford's 36 coves.

C-.:w A-1 I[MEs Prime

gjnie IjW

Continue to address the special l38

='"

I!

needs and issues of coastal areas.

I > [:

I Public AccessfSignage I

Improve public access to the vwer-3 front.

Water Dependent Uses Continue to encourage water-depen-3 dent activities at appropriate sites. r ZL.r I'.s [M MBSlS I Ty.hark" emn nndnftn Activities of the Harbor Manage-40 ment and Planning and Zoning Commissions should be coordi-nated.

Coastal Flooding Issues Discourage or prevent development 40 t

in coastal high hazard zones unless no feasible alternatives exist.

'Ii 107

Legend RPC HMC SSAC EDC DOE FEC Res.

Rocration & Parlm Harbor Managanat Seaside Av. Coy Eunomic DeveL Board of Education Flod/Erosion Coant.

Reside-108

r rRM 0

i e

Housing Diversity Continue to provide for a diversity 48 of housing types in Waterford.

Encourage housing availability for a 49 variety of age and income groups.

Residential Zonin Modify some residential zoning 49_

designations and regulations.

Ensure residential development is 49 W.

t C

compatible with land capabilities.

Adopt a developable land reguration 49 n

that applies to all residential uses.

Consider adopting a residential 50 I:

density regulation.

Eliminate the Open Space (OS) 52 X

zone.

Eliminate combined residential/

52 X

commercial zones.

Revise the zoning along the east 52 E

side of Route 85.

Village Residential Development Extend the Village Residential zone 52 X

to eligible neighborhoods.

Consider limited expansion of 52 existing Village Residential zones.

Establish new Village Residential 5 3 zones under certain conditions.

I.IMulti-Family Developments Guide the design and location of l 54 multi-family developments.

i d

1I Housing Imnrovement and Maintenance Encourage improvement of housing 54 units and neighborhoods in town.

Consider adopting an anti-blight 54 ordinance..

109

Legend I

Economic Develooment Efforts RPC Recrcafion & Park HMC Haubc Managemat SSAC Seaside Av. Com.

EDC Economic Dew!

DOE Boad of ducation FEC Floodosion Coin Re.

Resdent Continue efforts to encourage 57 economic development in town.

m a

m Make improvements to encourage 58 f

S<

C appropriate business development.

Appropriate Types and Locations Encourage compatible economic 59 Cn.

~

k~~bk ok D

development.

f1l Direct business growth to the 59 Business Triangle.

Business Zoning and Uses Modify some business zoning 60 designations and regulations.

Undertake a comprehensive review f60 of business zones and regulations.

Change some of the business zoning 60 districts.

Revise the zoning along the cast 62 side of Route 85.

Consider allowing small businesses 62 Cf.

in the Village Residential districts.

Consider allowing bed and break-62 k

fasts in residential zones.

Design Review Process Establish a design review processl 62 I

l for non-residential development.

l r I

(

I 110

h

FZC CC RTM D

Toa OU*r

I General Facilities Address identified community 64 facility and service needs.

Continue to improve the Civic 65 Triangle.

Monitor and address evolving 65 community needs as well.

I I

Eucation Facilities Continue to monitor and project 66 school enrollments.

Consider the long-term enrollment potential.

Plan school facilities for maximum 67 efficiency and flexibility.

Continue to use school facilities for 67

Ct recreation and community needs.

Recreation Facilities Continue to provide adequate public 68 t

E recreation facilities.

Maintain the quantity and quality of 68 existing recreational fatcilities.

Plan for anticipated Cormn~nlity 70 recreation needs.

Continue to encourage non-public 70 recreational, where appropriate.

I I

Fiscal Considerations Plan now for future community 70 facility needs.

Strive to use near-term fiscal re-70 sources to provide for fixture com-munity facility needs.

111

Legend DOF RPC WMC SSAC EDC BOR FEC Ret Agrits or Pa I

Board ofFinance Recreation & Parks Harbor Management Seaside.Av. Com.

Ecoomic DeveL Board of Education Flood/Erosion CoaL Reacpnt

.AUa"Qas r.

TVa.

.v a *A,

W U.

V sa Maintain the best features of the existing transportation syster Balance traffic needs with com-munity and environmental impacts.

Reevaluate road design standards and road classifications.

Preserve the capacity of existing 112

a Design Comnut-tee.

Modifr regulations to include design review in the application process.

S6 113

Iegend resources in fbrcL 4.

Encourage local organizations to be active in historic Dreservation.

91 4.-

BOF RPC MIIC SSAC EDC BOX FEC Res.

Recreation & Parka Harbor Management Seaside Adv. Com Economic DeveL Board of Education FlioodTosion CoaL Residents Encourage nominations to the State and/or National Register.

911-1 Use the demolition delay ordinance to preserve cultural resources.

91 Encourage preservation of existing 91 resources in order to maintain and enhance community character.

Promote awareness of state and tIF federal assistance programs.

Encourage development to be 91 compatible with historic character.

Continue to document cultural and 91 archeological resource.

Consmmar esmavusnmg ne[v zoning along the east side of Route 85.

I I I I Undertake a special study of the I"

Civic Triangle.

Update the 1985 Mago Point Study.

95 Undertake special studies of major road corridors such as Routes 1, 32, and 85.

95 I-114

Continue to work cooperatively 96

~

Cn.Tzn at at with other municipalities in areas of common interest.

Continue to work cooperatively 96 a

t t

with regional economic development agencies.

Coordinate with appropriate pro-9 T.

Cant, ssn tst grams and efforts of regional plan-fing encies.

Maintain a combined Planning and Zoning Commission.

I Update local regulations.

j97 Maintain regulations that are easy to understand and use.

97

+,

Maintain inspection and enforce-ment procedures.

97 Encourage education and training of Commission members and staff.

97 Establish an efficient process and desirable timetables for staff com-97 ments.

I Continue to develop materials about the application review process.

97

115,

Legend Use the Plan as a basis for land use decisions.

Undertake a comprehensive review of the land use regulations.

Include projects in the Town's Capital Improvements Program.

RPC HMC SSAC EDC BOE FEC Res.

Recreation & Parks Harbor Management Seaside Adv. Com Economic Devel.

Board of Education Flood/Erosion Cot Residents Notify boards and agencies of the requirements of CGS Section 8-24.

104 Strive to implement recommenda-tions in accordance with the sched-ules.

104 Strive to implement recommenda-104 tions as assigned to each responsi-ble agency.

116

CONCLUSION The Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development is a statement of a future vision for Waterford and strategies to attain that vision.

In preparing the Plan, an Ad-Hoc Plan of Conservation and Development Review Committee and the Planning and Zoning Commission:

• reviewed and discussed information about Waterford,

• developed goals and policies for Waterford, and recommended a number of strategies to be considered and imple-mented during the planning period.

In addition, a resident telephone survey was conducted and a number and variety of public meetings and public forums were held. During this process, a vision for Waterford's future was established.

By capturing and communicating this future vision for Waterford, an important first step is made toward attaining that.vision. As the Cat indicated to Alice in Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland - it doesn't much matter which way you go if you don't know, or care, where you want to get to.

The second step of realizing the vision comes from preparing recommendations that establish an action program. In essence, the destination has been established and the means of reaching that destination are now known.

The final step in attaining the vision is the implementation of the Plan of Preserva-tion, Conservation and Development. While that task rests with all residents of Waterford, it is also coordinated by the Planning and Zoning Commission and other Town agencies.

While situations and conditions will undoubtedly change during the planning period, the Plan establishes a beacon for all Waterford residents to work towards.

In addition, it provides flexibility in exactly how to attain that vision.

The adopted goals, objectives, and policies of the Plan of Preservation, Conserva-tion and Development are truly a guide to realizing the future vision of Waterford.

Through the implementation of these guidelines, it is hoped that Waterford's vision of the future will come to be.

By preparing this Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development, the proc-ess of attaining that vision has already begun.

117

1998 Waterford Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development Acknowledgments The Residents of Waterford and the Planning and Zoning Commission Ed Maguire, Chairman Ed Pellegri, Vice Chairman Lany Levine Gwen Lombardi Pat Blinderman Michael Artis, Alternate Sam Bellucci, Alternate Tom Bums, Alternate Ad-Hoc Plan of Conservation and Development Review Committee John "Bill" Sheehan, Chainnan Pat Blinderman Ross Lally Larry Levine James Miner Theodore Olynciw Ed Pellegri Zoning Board of Appeals Planing and Zoning Commission Conservation Commission Planning and Zoning Commission Conservation Commission Economic Development Planning and Zoning Commission Technical and Administrative Assistance Provided by:

Thomas V. Wagner, AICP Mark Wujtewicz Pamela Hagerman Planimetrics, LLP Yankee Planning Group (Cn MeA coaan d pen Vsa)

Wilbur Smith Associates (RanVtation)

DataCore Partners, Inc.

(cony Planning Director GIS Technician Recording Secretary Glenn Chalder, AICP Bruce Hoben, AICP Daniel Rothenberg Harry Strate, PE Joshua Lecar, PE Gregory Sottile 118