2012 Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development Part 1 (PDF)
document center
| Pages | 92 |
|---|---|
| File Size | 6.7 MB |
| Folder | Departments/Planning & Development |
| OCR Status | Searchable (OCR processed) |
| Source URL | Original |
Document Preview
Full Text (OCR Extracted)
WATERFORD 2012 Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development Part 1 - Policy Element Effective– January 1, 2012 Table Of Contents Introduction … About Waterford 2 About This Plan And Planning 3 Planning Considerations 4 Plan Organization 13 Preserve … Natural Resources 16 Coastal Resources 20 Open Space 24 Enhance … Community Character 32 Quality of Life 38 Sustainability / Resiliency 40 Guide … Overall Structure 48 Residential Development 54 Business Development 58 Support … Community Facilities 66 Transportation 68 Utility Infrastructure 74 Conclusion … Future Land Use Plan 80 Consistency With Other Plans 82 Implementation 85 Looking Ahead 87 1 Town of Waterford October 18, 2011 To The Residents of Waterford, This document is the 2012 Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development for Waterford. It out- lines the broad strategic directions for the physical, economic, and social development of Waterford for the foreseeable future. The Plan was prepared over a two-year period with extensive public participation including: Multiple workshop meetings where residents participated in recommending strategies for Water- ford’s future and telephone surveys where a cross-section of residents were asked for their input on community is- sues and strategies. The Planning and Zoning Commission considered all of this input when finalizing the Plan. As a result of these efforts, the Plan is thought to reflect the consensus of the community at the time the Plan was adopted. The Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development is called Part 1 -Policy Element since there is a companion document called the Implementation Element. The Policy Element is the Plan of Conserva- tion and Development referred to in CGS Section 8-23. The Implementation Element, which identifies actions to implement the strategies, is intended to be a working document which will be used by Town staff and agencies to implement the recommendations in the Policy Element. It is envisioned that the Implementation Element will be regularly updated to reflect community progress and priorities. Following a public hearing held on October 17, the Planning and Zoning Commission adopted this Plan and established an effective date of January 1, 2012. Sincerely, Waterford Planning and Zoning Commission January 1, 2012 2 Introduction About Waterford … Located in southeast Connecticut, Waterford is a suburban community with a strong economic base. Wa- terford is home to about 19,500 people and contains over 630 businesses employing about 11,000 people. As a coastal community located along the Interstate 95 corridor, Waterford enjoys a number of strategic locational advantages. In addition, Waterford is home to several important cultural and recreational landmarks such as the Eugene O’Neill Theater Center and Harkness Memorial State Park. Waterford has a rich history spanning from subsistence agriculture to its modern-day role as an economic center in the region. Throughout its history, Waterford has demonstrated a long-range outlook to pro- mote the welfare of its residents. January 1, 2012 3 About This Plan and Planning … This Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development is a guide for the future of Waterford. The Plan primarily addresses the physical development of Waterford and is also intended to influence the social and economic development of the community. While this Plan is an advisory document, it identi- fies strategies which will result in the most positive outcomes for the Town and provides a framework for consistent decision making. This Plan differs somewhat from prior plans for Waterford in that: it is intended to be shared with all Waterford households and businesses, it promotes a more pro-active approach to guiding the activities of the Town, it includes the major policy boards of the Town (such as the Representative Town Meeting, Board of Selectmen, and Board of Finance), and it has been configured to promote a commitment to implementation. The Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development for the Town of Waterford is a two-part docu- ment. This part –the “Policy Element” - is a statement of strategic directions which are considered important for Waterford in order to preserve and enhance those things considered integral to the overall character, ambience, and quality of life in the Town. It is “big picture” and strategic in nature so that Waterford residents will use it to discuss and refine the major directions of the community. It is envisioned that the Policy Element will be reviewed every 5-10 years (or as otherwise needed) to ensure that the strategic directions for Waterford are appro- priate for addressing the issues facing the community. The companion part –the “Implementation Element” – is a detailed compi- lation of tasks and programs which will help accomplish the overall strate- gies. That element identifies specific tasks to be completed, the entity re- sponsible for completing the task, and the anticipated timeframe for com- pletion. As tasks and programs are implemented and results are evaluat- ed, it is envisioned that the Implementation Element will be updated to acknowledge completed tasks and to add new tasks. The Plan recommends that the Implementation Element be maintained and administered by a Plan Im- plementation Committee. The Committee would review the Implementation Element every year to en- sure that the work program and tasks for the coming year (and beyond) reflect fiscal and operational ca- pabilities. While the Policy Element of the Plan will be updated less frequently than the Implementation Element, the Policy Element should evolve as the needs of the community change. As new issues come to light, the community should strive to update the Policy Element by evaluating alternative approaches and se- lecting the best overall strategy for Waterford. The fact that a topic or issue is not addressed in the Policy Element should not prevent it from being considered at some time in the future, January 1, 2012 4 Planning Considerations A Unique History The Waterford landscape was formed over millions of years by the interaction of geologic and climatic forces. The first Native Americans are believed to have inhabited this area about 10,000 years ago. They lived as hunters, fishers, gatherers, and farmers, primarily along the Thames River and the Niantic River. Euro- pean exploration of this area began after 1614 and quickly advanced to trade with Native Americans and permanent settlement, especially after the Pequot War in 1637. What became New London was first settled around 1646. Due to the natural harbor, this village soon became a bustling seaport and the growing population pushed out into the surrounding areas. While the economy of New London was primarily focused on maritime trade and whaling, surrounding areas were devoted to subsistence agriculture, fishing, quarrying, and similar occupations. Over time, disagreements arose over taxation of residents in outlying areas for services which primarily benefitted residents of the more urban area. Residents of the outlying areas banded together and submit- ted petitions to the Legislature to establish a separate town. Several requests were denied before approv- al was granted in 1801. The Town of Waterford became the 109th town in Connecticut. Native Americans Agriculture In The Colonial Era www.pequotmuseum.org www.osv.org Map of New London Area (1766) Map of New London Area (1824) January 1, 2012 5 The arrival of railroads in the mid-1800s helped to transform the community. Many foreign-born or first- generation immigrants came to Waterford to work on local farms or in local quarries (such as at Millstone Point). In addition, the railroad helped make Waterford a popular shoreline and resort area. Several im- pressive waterfront estates were built in Waterford during this period and summer hotels and beach- cottage colonies were created. Many of these changes were aided and accelerated by the creation of a trolley system followed by the expansion of the road system and the proliferation of the automobile. Harkness Estate Early Real Estate Promotion With the onset of World War II, the US Naval Submarine Base and the Electric Boat Company (manufac- turers of submarines), both located in Groton, grew substantially. This new influx of activity helped spur additional population growth in Waterford during and after the war. In the 1960s and 1970s, three nuclear power plants were established at Millstone Point. The property tax benefits of these plants enabled Waterford to undertake significant community improvements and pro- vide substantial tax benefits to residents over the next few decades. During the 1990s, the economy of the region transitioned from a defense-based economy (nuclear subma- rines) to an entertainment-based economy with the opening of two casinos operated by Native Americans (two of the largest casinos in the United States). The casinos are now the largest employers in the region. In the late 1990s, deregulation of the electric industry resulted in the sale of Millstone Nuclear Power Plant (previously a regulated utility) and its subsequent operation as an electric generator. This change lowered the valuation of the facility resulting in a significantly smaller contribution to the tax base. Nautilus Nuclear Submarine Millstone Power Station January 1, 2012 6 Changing Demographics Waterford has experienced three main population trends over the course of its history. From incorporation in 1801 to about 1910, the overall population of Waterford grew slowly. This time period was dominated by subsistence agriculture, farming for export to other areas, granite quarries, and the shoreline resort era. With the introduction of trolley service in the early 1900s (such as the New Lon- don and East Lyme Street Railway), this began to change. From 1920 to about 1970, the population of Waterford grew dramatically from about 4,000 residents to about 17,000 residents. This growth reflected national trends of suburbanization out from larger cities and overall economic growth in the region. Growth was also supported by a trolley / streetcar system, bus service, the increasing availability of the automobile and the expansion of the highway network. During the 1970s and 1980s, population growth slowed in Waterford. In fact, Waterford was one of the slowest growing communities in southeast Connecticut during the 1980s. Since 1990, Waterford has con- tinued to grow, albeit modestly. How Waterford may grow in the future is not clear. Over the past several decades, the age composition of Waterford has changed as many residents have chosen to age in place due to reasonable taxes and the overall quality of life. Older households tend to get smaller over time as children move out and other changes happen. As a result, population growth which resulted from new housing construction was offset by changes in the 8,000 or so other housing units in Waterford. Consider that the average household size in Waterford has decreased from 3.23 per- sons per unit in 1970 to 2.38 persons per unit in 2010 (compared to a 2010 state average of 2.52 persons per unit). From a demographic perspective, the older population in Waterford (2010 median age of 46.1 years com- pared to the state median age of 40.0 years) has resulted in a trend towards a natural population decrease (a lower birth rate and a higher death rate). In other words, without net in-migration, Waterford might have lost population over the past decade or so. 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 1810 1830 1850 1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990 2010 2030 Number of Residents Census Population Low Projections High Projections January 1, 2012 7 Predicting future migration rates is one of the most challenging aspects of population projections. If the recent total population change continues, Waterford might continue to grow at a modest rate (the high projection in the chart on the preceding page). On the other hand, if the amount of migration is modest, Waterford may experience a lower birth rate, higher death rate, and less growth overall. In that scenario, Waterford might lose population over the next decade or so. While overall population changes can be important, it is the changing age composition of a community which can have the most impact on municipal functions. As the following chart indicates, Waterford (like many other communities) is undergoing a fundamental demographic shift where older age groups are becoming dominant as people live longer and healthier lives. 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 5-Year Age Group Number of Residents Ages 0-19 Ages 20-54 Ages 55+ Changing Fiscal Conditions In the 1980s and 1990s, Waterford had one of the largest tax bases of any community in Connecticut due to the Millstone nuclear facility. Waterford received significant tax revenues from this facility and this helped keep taxes low for residents and businesses and supported a wide variety of services and facilities for residents. However, due to utility deregulation, Millstone now generates less tax revenue than it did previously. As a result, Waterford is in the process of adapting municipal spending to reflect this new fiscal reality and reconcile community needs and desires with available funding. When asked about taxes in Waterford as part of the telephone survey, about 63 percent of residents felt that taxes in Waterford were still reasonable. About 70 percent of residents indicated that taxes in Water- ford were about the same or lower in comparison to other towns in the area. January 1, 2012 8 Land Use and Zoning As shown by the colored areas on the land use map below, about 8,723 acres of Waterford’s land area (about 41 percent) is developed, built upon, or used for some social or economic purpose (including land preserved as open space). The uncolored areas (12,653 acres) are lands which may be developable in the future. How these land areas may be used in the future is a key consideration of this Plan of Preserva- tion, Conservation and Development. Existing Land Use January 1, 2012 9 The colored areas on the zoning map below indicate the types of uses presently allowed in different areas of Waterford. Overall, most areas of Waterford are intended for residential uses (yellow, white and green areas). Existing Zoning January 1, 2012 10 Overall Community Issues As part of the process of preparing this Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development, Water- ford residents participated in a number of exercises which were used to help identify issues and con- cerns. These exercises included a series of community work- shop meeting on different topics and telephone sur- veys of Waterford resi- Public Meeting Discussion What Residents Like Most About Waterford One of the telephone surveys involved a random sample of 300 Waterford households. Participants in the telephone survey were asked what they liked most about living in Waterford. Overall, the general ambience of the community and physical attributes seemed to strongly influence people’s satisfaction with living in Waterford. 37 % Attribute Beautiful place, nice community, friendly people, small town feeling, etc. 30 % Location Close to work, close to shore, convenience, near family, etc. 11 % Municipal Service Schools, fire, police, etc. 9 % Taxes Or Fiscal Issues Low taxes 14 % Other What Residents Like Least About Waterford Participants in the telephone survey were also asked what they liked least about living in Waterford. Since almost half of all participants did not identify anything they liked least, the responses seem to indi- cate that people are generally satisfied with the overall quality of life in Waterford. 48 % Nothing Nothing / Don’t know / No response 18 % Traffic / Development Traffic congestion, too much development, not enough development, too many condos, etc. 14 % Taxes Or Fiscal Issues Taxes, spending, etc. 10 % Municipal Services Schools, public works, etc. 10 % Other Location, weather, etc. January 1, 2012 11 Most Important Issues Residents were asked what they felt was the most important issue facing the Town at the time the survey was done (December 2010) and then, as a follow-up question, what was the next most important issue facing the Town. As a result of utility deregulation and the lower tax payments from Millstone, residents understand that fiscal issues are an important consideration in Waterford. First Mentioned Second Mentioned 53 % Local Fiscal Issues Taxes/rising taxes 37% 24% Town spending/budget 16% 6% 29 % Local Services Education/schools 18% 28% Public services (trash, roads, etc.) 7% 9% Fire/Police Departments 2% 2% Lack of youth focus 2% 3% 10 % Overall Economy Lack of economy/industry/business 4% 5% Employment/jobs 3% 1% Economy 3% - 8 % Other Issues Millstone closing/safety 5% 4% Safety 1% 2% Cost of living 1% 2% Politics/local government 1% 3% None - 5% Traffic - 4% Environment/beaches - 3% Desired Changes All survey participants were asked what one thing, if anything, they would like to see changed or modi- fied in Waterford. While almost half of all respondents did not identify anything they felt should be changed or modified, others mentioned municipal services or lower taxes. 47 % Nothing Nothing/none 30% Don’t know/unsure 17% 23 % Local Services Roads/public works/public services 7% Schools 4% More focus on youth 3% Parks / playgrounds/ bike paths 3% Policing / enforce speed limits 3% Government / politics 3% 16 % Fiscal Changes Lower taxes 10% Decrease spending/budget 5% Spend less on administrators 1% 15 % Development Policies More development/business 5% Need town center / community area 3% More environment focus / wetlands 2% Less development 2% More public transportation 1% More focus on the elderly 1% More sidewalks 1% January 1, 2012 12 Through the public meetings and the telephone survey, it was learned that Waterford residents: are generally satisfied with the overall direction of the community, are concerned about fiscal issues, and would like to maintain the overall quality of life in the community. In terms of the physical, economic, and social development of the community, the input received from Waterford residents indicated they want to: preserve those things which contribute to the overall character and ambience of the community, enhance the overall character and quality of life of Waterford, guide future growth and change in ways that will enhance the community, and continue to provide the support services and facilities that are needed in the community. These basic elements became the foundation for this Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Develop- ment: In addition, this input influenced the following overall goal which guided preparation of this Plan: Guide the future of Waterford so that: important resources will be preserved, development will enhance neighborhoods and the community, community needs will be addressed, and the overall ambience and quality of life will be maintained. Public Meeting Exercises Public Meeting Exercises January 1, 2012 13 Plan Organization Based on the preceding input, this Plan has been organized around the following thematic elements: Preserve Those things which are important for Waterford to pro- tect or preserve. Enhance Those things which are important for Waterford to en- hance in order to promote the overall quality of life. Guide How the Town should approach, manage, and guide fu- ture development activities. Support How services and facilities should be provided to help meet community needs. January 1, 2012 14 Preserve … In the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet, we all breathe the same air, we all cherish our children's futures, and we are all mortal. John F. Kennedy American President January 1, 2012 15 January 1, 2012 16 PRESERVE Natural Resources GOAL Preserve, protect, and enhance natural resources in order to maintain environmental health and support our overall quality of life. Natural resources (land, water, air, plants and animals) help support the overall character of Waterford and the quality of life in the community. It is considered important to preserve and enhance these re- sources in order to maintain the richness of natural communities, promote diversity in biological/natural habitats and species, and preserve the relationship of environmental health to human health and well- being. These resources are highly valued by residents and, as responsible stewards, we will strive to pro- tect these resources for present and future generations. Waterford has demonstrated a strong commitment to environmentally sensitive land use planning and, by most accounts, is doing a good job protecting natural resources. As a result, the main strategy will be to maintain and enhance efforts to protect these resources in the future. In the telephone survey, participants were asked about Town efforts in some areas of natural resource protection. In general, participants felt the Town was devoting the right amount of effort to protection of these resources. Issue Too Little Effort Effort Just Right Too Much Effort Not Sure / Don’t Know Protecting environmental quality. 15% 65% 3% 17% Protecting wetlands and bodies of water. 13% 60% 9% 18% Vernal Pool Wetland Spotted Salamander January 1, 2012 17 A. Protect Water Quality In terms of future strategies, protecting water quality (surface water and ground water) is an important priority for Waterford since the overall health of residents and the environment relies on having clean water. Almost all forms of life require water and we will do our part to preserve the integrity of water resources in Waterford. In recognition of this, Waterford: has undertaken and participated in numerous studies of sensitive watersheds such as the Niantic River, Jordan Cove, Stony Brook, and Jordan Brook, participates in a number of water quality related programs such as the Jordan Cove Urban Wa- tershed Project (www.jordancove.uconn.edu/) and the Niantic River Watershed group (www.nianticriverwatershed.org/), and performs water quality testing of a selection of streams (for monitoring environmental health) twice a year. While water quality protection is important in all areas of the community, it is especially important in watersheds that contribute to: public water supply reservoirs and supply sources, and coves and embayments such as Niantic Bay and Jordan Cove. Waterford has been a leader within Connecticut in implementing water quality treatment systems for storm drainage and promoting water recharge as opposed to water discharge (now referred to as “low impact development” (LID) techniques). In fact, Waterford was doing this long before it be- came popular. Much of this has been accomplished through Town Staff working with engineers and develop- ers rather than through specific regulatory re- quirements. In the future, Waterford should con- tinue to be a leader in this area and should adopt specific provisions in its regulations to implement LID techniques. Water Quality Basin The Town should continue to develop and implement strategies to ensure healthy watersheds such as those presented in the Jordan Brook Watershed Management Plan, the Niantic River Watershed Man- agement Plan, and similar plans as they are prepared in the future. B. Protect Plants And Animals And Their Habitats Plants and animals are key indicators of environmental health and an important part of a healthy and functioning ecosystem. The overall strategies in Waterford are to: protect habitats for rare and endangered species and other sites as listed on the Natural Diversity Database maintained by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, seek to create and protect unobstructed natural corridors to connect important habitats and sus- tain species diversity, strive to maintain the health of fisheries and shellfish beds, and control invasive species to the extent possible. January 1, 2012 18 C. Protect Important Natural Resources The following table (and the map on the facing page) outlines natural resource conservation priorities for Waterford. Waterford should continue efforts to identify important resource areas and conserve and pro- tect these areas. Priority Resource Significant Water quality, inland and coastal Watercourses Poorly drained soils (wetlands) Floodplain (100-year, 1.0% annual probability) Soils with slopes in excess of 25% Active public water supply watersheds (Lake Konomoc) Potential public water supply watersheds (Miller Pond) Important Special species, habitat, or scenic areas High groundwater availability (aquifers) Back-up public water supply watersheds (Lake Brandegee) Floodplain (500-year, 0.2% annual probability) Forested areas Inland, estuarine and marine environments D. Expand Conservation Planning Continuing to develop and implement sound strategies for natural resource conservation is an important recommendation of the Plan. Waterford should strive to enhance the capacity of Town boards/agencies to think strategically about such issues. Lake Konomoc Piping Plover See the “Implementation Element” of the Waterford Plan of Preservation, Conserva- tion and Development for information on tasks and actions currently programmed for implementation of these Natural Resource strategies. January 1, 2012 20 PRESERVE Coastal Resources GOAL Preserve, protect, and enhance coastal areas. As a coastal community, Waterford contains a variety of coastal resources along the shoreline from Niantic Bay on the west to Long Island Sound on the south and the Thames River on the east. Coastal area resources in Waterford include sandy beaches and shorelands, dunes, bluffs and escarpments, tidal wetlands, submerged aquatic vegetation, and shellfish beds. These coastal resources contribute to overall community character and quality of life and the health of the marine ecosystem. As defined in State statutes (CGS 22a-94), the coastal area includes off-shore waters and land areas within 1,000 feet of the shore. While the Coastal Area Management Act focuses on activities in the coastal area, it is widely recognized that coastal resources are also affected by activities which occur upstream. In fact, the issues of sedimen- tation, hypoxia, pathogens, toxic contaminants and floatable debris are probably caused more by up- stream activity than by activities in the thin coastal band along the shoreline. That is why upland activi- ties need to be managed carefully in order to protect sensitive coastal resources. It is important to recognize that some coastal area management strategies are also addressed in other por- tions of the Plan (such as the Natural Resources section). A. Protect Coastal Resources Waterford will continue to protect and manage coastal resources in accordance with the coastal area management plan and policies. Priority Resource Significant Water quality, especially in coves and embayments, in terms of runoff, sedimen- tation, hypoxia, pathogens, toxic contaminants and floatable debris Marine and wildlife habitat (including shellfish beds) and adjacent shorelands Barrier beaches and inter-tidal areas Floodplain (coastal high hazard zones) Important Areas for water dependent uses, including harbor areas Providing for coastal public access (including signage) and upland facilities con- sistent with the capacity of the resource Preserve scenic resources Avoid diminishing or impairing visual resources January 1, 2012 22 B. Manage and Guide Coastal Activities Waterford will also continue to manage and guide development and activities in coastal areas in accord- ance with the coastal area management plan and policies. This includes issues related to public access, water dependent uses, maritime navigation, and similar policies. C. Coordinate Oversight of Activities In Coastal Areas Some activities in coastal areas may involve overlapping jurisdiction with the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Harbor Management Commission, the Shellfish Commissions, the Flood and Erosion Control Board, Ledge Light Health District, and others. To the extent possible, policies and activities among these agencies should be coordinated to better serve the goals and policies of the Town and help in preserving these unique resources. The need for coordination also extends to other organizations such as the advisory committee for the Niantic River watershed. Waterford participated with East Lyme, Salem, and Montville to develop the Niantic River Watershed Management Plan and is now coordinating on implementation. Efforts such as these should continue. Critical Barrier Beach At Jordan Cove Public Access At Mago Point Clamming Maritime Recreation See the “Implementation Element” of the Waterford Plan of Preservation, Conserva- tion and Development for information on tasks and actions currently programmed for implementation of these Coastal Resource strategies. January 1, 2012 23 D. Be Aware Of Flooding Potential In Coastal Areas In coastal areas, flooding potential is influenced by a number of factors including land elevation, wind intensity, wind direction, storm surge, tidal fluctuation, and shore configuration. Several studies (www.coastalresilience.org and other studies by the federal government) have evaluated the potential for coastal flooding and identified areas most at risk due to possible sea level rise the confluence of these dif- ferent factors affecting flooding potential. Waterford will continue to manage activities in shoreline areas in recognition of the potential for coastal flooding. Estimate of Potential Category 3 Storm Impact (2020) January 1, 2012 24 PRESERVE Open Space GOAL Establish a meaningful system of open spaces in order to protect im- portant resources and enhance our overall quality of life. This Plan defines “dedicated open space” as land that is owned by entities or otherwise restricted in some way where such land is likely to be preserved or dedicated as open space, hopefully in perpetuity (town park, state forest, land trust, etc.). The terms “managed open space” is used to refer to lands owned by entities or used in a way where it serves some open space function but it may not be preserved in perpe- tuity, may not allow for public access or use, or has another purpose (golf courses, water company lands, cemeteries, hunting clubs, some utility lands, etc.). Preservation of open space can serve five important purposes: protection of community character, preservation of lands for parks and recreational uses, conservation of important natural resources, fiscal and economic benefits, and shaping of development patterns. Approximately 3,230 acres of land (15 % of the land area) in Waterford can be categorized as open space since it has some measure of protection from future development through ownership, easement, or com- patible use. Some of these areas (Harkness, Arboretum, etc.) are the most treasured places in Waterford and make a significant contribution to the overall character of the community. Other areas help protect natural resources or scenic resources or provide recreation opportunities. However, 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 development. One of the reasons that neighbors oppose new developments is over the loss of what they perceive to be open space. There is little doubt that open space adds considerably to the overall ambience and quality of life of the community. Waterford should seek to continue to acquire and manage open space lands for the benefit of the Town and its population. Otherwise, open lands and familiar landscapes will continue to change as the development of the Town continues and opportunities to acquire these lands will be lost. In the telephone survey, 58% of participants want the Town to acquire more land for parks and open space. However, residents were less willing to support increased taxes to fund open space preservation. Waterford residents are more strongly in favor of efforts to establish a trail system for pedestrians and bicycles. Overall, 79 percent of participants want the Town to devote efforts to establish a trail system. January 1, 2012 25 Again, since only about one-third of residents were willing to pay more in taxes to fund creation of a trail system, attention may need to be devoted to accomplishing this within existing resources. Issue Strongly And Somewhat Agree Not Sure / Don’t Know Somewhat And Strongly Disagree The Town should acquire more land for parks and open space. 58% 8% 34% I would be willing to pay more in taxes if the money went to preserving open space land. 31% 6% 63% Waterford should try to create a trail system for pedes- trians and bicycles. 79% 5% 16% I would be willing to pay more in taxes if the money went to creating a trail system. 35% 6% 59% A. Increase The Amount Of Preserved Open Space In Waterford Waterford should strive to increase the amount of preserved open space in the community. Since there is no true standard of how much open space Waterford needs, the optimum amount is the amount that res- idents desire and the Town can afford (if purchased) or otherwise preserve (if by other means). Public ownership of open space is most desirable since it provides the most public benefits (including access and control). However, public ownership is not always required for open space preservation. For example, a coordinated system of greenbelts can be established through public dedication, public acquisi- tion, private conservation and access easements, cluster development, low-intensity zoning that preserves the greenbelt, and other techniques. So that Waterford has funds available for open space opportunities which may arise, money should be deposited each year into a Land Acquisition Fund (CGS 7-131r). If Waterford is to be successful at establishing an open space and greenway trail system, it must have the following things: A vision of what the community wishes to create, An organization devoted to maintaining and implementing the vision, and The tools and resources to implement the vision. Open Space Greenway Trails January 1, 2012 26 B. Establish A Coordinated Open Space / Greenbelt / Trail System Since the 1977 Plan of Development, Waterford has had a stated goal of establishing “a comprehensive greenbelt system which … follows the town’s major streams and brooks.” This strategy should continue to be the basic foundation for Waterford’s open space strategy. In addition, we should strive to use such greenbelt areas and other opportunities (including electric rights-of-way or sewer easements if possible) to establish an overall trail system throughout the commu- nity. Such a trail system will provide connections between different parts of Waterford as the trail system evolves and provide passive recreation opportunities for residents. As part of preparing this Plan, the preliminary open space plan on the facing page (an overall vision) was prepared. This is not intended to be a definitive statement of the desired open space and greenway ar- rangement for Waterford. Rather, it is intended to be a starting point for further discussion and refine- ment of an open space and greenway system. In the future, special attention should be devoted to increasing open space connectivity. Experience in other communities has shown that open spaces increase exponentially in value for nature, wildlife or people when they are configured to create continuous corridors. Based on this vision, the policy preferences in terms of the preservation of open space include the follow- ing: Seek to establish an open space “system” as a major organizing element in Waterford by helping to define the villages, separate developed areas, and provide for transitions between different ar- eas, Use the open space / greenbelt / trail system to help interconnect different parts of town and link open spaces and neighborhoods by trails (pedestrian path / bikeway / hiking trail system) or “greenbelts” that are accessible to residents throughout Waterford, Acquire or preserve parcels that contribute the most to the town’s open space and greenbelt sys- tem. 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 re- gion. Contribute to the overall character of Waterford and to the enjoyment and quality of life for resi- dents. In order to guide future efforts, the Town should use the map on the facing page as starting point for cre- ating an overall open space plan that: specifies the location of all existing 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). January 1, 2012 28 To maximize the utility of the open space system, Waterford should strive to establish a comprehensive trail system in the community. A trail system in open space/greenbelt areas will provide wonderful rec- reation 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 addi- tion, 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. C. Designate An Agency To Coordinate Open Space / Greenway Efforts Even though this Plan of Preservation, Conservation and Development will be adopted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the open space and greenway plan should be maintained and refined by anoth- er agency which can dedicate more time to that effort, especially implementation. While the Conservation Commission might be an appropriate entity to coordinate this effort, the Town may also decide that a special committee with representatives from a variety of existing Town agencies (Planning and Zoning Commission, Conservation Commission, Recreation and Parks Commission, Board of Finance, Representative Town Meeting, etc.) may be a better approach. Open Space Trail Greenway Trails See the “Implementation Element” of the Waterford Plan of Preservation, Conserva- tion and Development for information on tasks and actions currently programmed for implementation of these Open Space strategies. January 1, 2012 29 D. Provide Adequate Tools and Resources To Provide Open Space and Greenways Recommended programs to preserve open space include: Regulatory Programs Description Benefits Constraints Open Space Set-Aside Requirement Obtain open space at the time of subdivision. No cost to community. May not create a meaning- ful overall system. Public access may be restricted. Fee-In-Lieu-Of Open Space Land Accept funds from a sub- divider in lieu of land. Can purchase open space where most desired Must be offered by subdi- vider. Public Acquisition Description Benefits Constraints Town Purchase Town purchases land for open space. Provides most control of location and use. Typically reactive. Re- quires local expenditures. Town Purchase with State / Federal Grants Town purchases land for open space with support from a grant. More cost effective for local taxpayers. Funding limited and can be very competitive. State or Federal Acquisition State or federal govern- ment purchases land for open space. Cost effective for local taxpayers. Funding limited and can be very competitive. Other Acquisition Description Benefits Constraints Land Trusts / Conservation Organizations / Institutions Acquisition by a land trust or conservation group. Typically pro-active and work with owners. Need dedicated volun- teers. May not have fund- ing. Public / Private Partnership Joint acquisition by Town and other group(s). Can be more cost effective for each group. Coordination may be chal- lenging. Philanthropy / Donation Property owners donate land or partial value. Lowered cost of acquisi- tion. May not create a meaning- ful overall system. State / Federal / Water Company Disposition Acquisition from another agency Can be more cost effective for each group. Opportunities may be lim- ited. Easements For Trails Acquisition of an easement to establish a trail Significant public benefits, can be very cost effective May involve multiple property owners. Funding Programs Description Benefits Constraints Land Acquisition Fund A municipal account funded from the operating budget (CGS 7-131r) Generate money over time for acquisitions. Future funding is not as- sured. Open Space Bond Issue A municipal account funded at one time as part of the capital budget. Generate money up front for acquisitions. Need community consen- sus. January 1, 2012 30 Enhance … Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of high inten- tion, sincere effort, intelligent direction and skillful execution; it represents the wise choice of many alternatives. William A. Foster American Author January 1, 2012 31 January 1, 2012 32 ENHANCE Community Character ENHANCE Maintain and enhance the overall character and ambience of Water- ford. The telephone surveys of Waterford residents found that many residents moved to Waterford because of its overall character and ambience. While the features that contributed to this perception varied, there is little doubt that the overall appearance and feeling of the community are important attributes to people. Based on comments from public meetings and feedback from the telephone surveys, the Plan recom- mends four main strategies for protecting and enhancing community character: establishing an advisory design review process preserving historical and archeological resources preserving and enhancing key scenic vistas and areas encouraging the preservation of undeveloped land (PA 490) Design Review Historic Character Scenic Resources See the “Implementation Element” of the Waterford Plan of Preservation, Conserva- tion and Development for information on tasks and actions currently programmed for implementation of these Community Character strategies. January 1, 2012 33 A. Establish An Advisory Design Review Process The 1998 Plan of Preservation, Conservation, and Development recommended establishing an advisory design review process. This remains a key recommendation of this Plan. In the telephone survey, 58% of participants want the Town to encourage or require better design so that major projects better fit into the character of Waterford. Residents at public meetings echoed this strategy. Over the years, residents have expressed concerns that the design of some newer buildings has not en- hanced the overall character of Waterford. As residents travel to other communities, they have seen the examples of newer buildings which are more in keeping with the ambience / character of the community and which have enhanced community appearance. Why can’t Waterford have the same thing? The Plan recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission establish an advisory design review com- mittee whose function will be to discuss design issues with an applicant and send a report to the Com- mission. The Committee would review non-residential buildings, multi-family residential projects, spe- cial permit applications, and any other project referred by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Issues that the Committee should consider and address include: Building Design Site Design scale, massing, height, cadence roof shapes, entry location overall architectural design quality and color of materials site layout, access building, parking location pedestrian improvements landscaping Over time, the Committee should develop design principles in order to provide as much guidance to ap- plicants 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. To start this process, the Planning and Zoning Commission should consider appointing a committee to research design review procedures and guidelines and report back with recommendations. During this process, the Commission could refer some applications to the committee for review and discussion. No Design Review Process (Prototype McDonald’s Restaurant) With Design Review Process (McDonald’s Restaurant in Freeport Maine) January 1, 2012 34 B. Continue to Protect Historic / Archeological Resources Waterford contains a variety of historic and archeological resources. These resources contribute to the overall ambience of the community and provide a direct connection to the history and “sense of place” of Waterford. However, these resources can be threatened in a number of different ways, including demolition of his- toric structures, disturbance of archeological artifacts, lack of awareness, and neglect. While 62% of participants in the telephone survey felt that the amount of Town effort towards preserving historic structures was “just right”, the Plan recognizes how fragile these resources can be. Since these resources can enrich our visual and emotional attachment to the community and since these resources can never be replaced, efforts to identify and preserve these resources should continue and, perhaps, re- ceive greater emphasis in the future. Some of the strategies to help protect these resources include: Identification Continue to undertake studies to identify and document historic and/or archeolog- ical resources in Waterford Recognition Continue nominating eligible areas or properties for inclusion in the State Register of Historic Places or the National Register of Historic Places Maintain a map showing areas of archeological sensitivity so that an archeological assessment can be required if warranted Preservation Encourage preservation of existing historic buildings Encourage and support preservation activities of current owners Cooperation Encourage the Waterford Historical Society and other organizations to undertake preservation activities Jordan Schoolhouse Archeological Investigation January 1, 2012 36 C. Preserve Scenic Resources Due to its coastal location and natural features, Waterford has some significant scenic views and re- sources. In addition, there are some roads in Waterford recognized for their scenic values. These scenic assets provide pleasure to residents and visitors on a daily basis. Waterford should continue efforts to preserve ke