The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a meeting at the Avon Town Hall on Tuesday July 16, 2013. Present were Duane Starr, Chair, and alternates Elaine Primeau, Donald Bonner and Jenna Ryan. Absent were Linda Keith, Vice Chair, Carol Griffin,
David Cappello, Marianne Clark, Peter Mahoney, and Christian Gackstatter. Also present was Steven Kushner, Director of Planning and Community Development.
Mr. Starr called the meeting to order at 7:30pm.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mrs. Primeau motioned to approve the minutes of the June 25, 2013, meeting, as submitted. The motion, seconded by Mrs. Ryan, received unanimous approval.
PUBLIC HEARING
App. #4669 - Avon Village, LLC, owner, Avon Village, LLC, and LCB Senior Living, LLC, applicants, request for 2-lot Subdivision, 11.0 acres, 117 and 121 Simsbury Road, Parcels 3970117 and 3970121, in a CP-A Zone
App. #4670 - Avon Village, LLC, owner, Avon Village, LLC, and LCB Senior Living, LLC, applicants, request for Special Exception under Section VI.E.3.b. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit 74-unit assisted living facility, 117 Simsbury Road, Parcel 3970117, in a CP-A Zone
Also heard at this time but not part of the public hearing:
App. #4671 - Avon Village, LLC, owner, Avon Village, LLC, and LCB Senior Living, LLC, applicants, request for Site Plan approval to permit assisted living facility, 117 Simsbury Road, Parcel 3970117 in a CP-A Zone
Present to represent these applications were James Ryan, RLA, John Meyer Consulting;
Stephen Puliafico, Ed SanClemente, Michael Stoller, and Ted Doyle, LCB Senior Living; Matthew Herz, owner; and Patrick Mallon, Buildable Sites, LLC.
Mr. Puliafico explained that Michael Stoller is his business partner and started Newton Senior Living in the mid 1990s and developed 9 assisted living properties (7 in MA and 2 in RI). He noted that 12 additional properties were acquired; 4 are located in CT. He stated that his company was sold in 2006 but explained that he was contacted by a former client who requested that he manage 2 properties which he agreed to do and started in January of 2011. Mr. Puliafico indicated that his company recently acquired a 50-unit, 83-bed Alzheimer facility in Bedford, NH and 2 other acquisitions are in process right now. He explained that each property is permitted as an assisted building and noted that the majority of residents are assisted. He added that the individuals that come in, initially, on an
independent plan often convert quickly to an assisted plan. Approximately 25% to 30% of the residents are in Alzheimer’s units; he noted that that is the plan in Avon. He concluded by noting that LCB wishes to be a good community neighbor and would offer/open the building for municipal meetings, school functions, and all types of community functions.
Mr. Ryan addressed sight distance and noted that the State DOT agrees that the proposed driveway location is the best, as it provides the maximum amount of sight distance. He noted that a plan was recently submitted to the State DOT and the plan addresses both intersection sight distance and stopping sight distance; both criteria have been met and agreed to by the State DOT. He noted that the physical sight distance is maximized by being located at the top of the slope and the slopes will be cut back to create a sight triangle to ensure that the vehicles exiting the proposed facility have plenty of distance to see approaching vehicles. Mr. Ryan noted that the applicants believe that the proposed driveway location is, by far, both the best and the safest; he added that it is also believed that the State
DOT agrees.
Mr. Ryan addressed onsite parking accommodations and stated that 3 parking spots have been added to the plans and are shown as grass pavers in the trash containment area, so as to preserve the green space. He noted that 4 parking spaces have also been added to the rear access pond maintenance area; he noted that employees could park here if overflow occurred.
Mr. Ryan addressed events at the facility and noted that information pertaining to the type of events and when they would occur has been provided to the Director of Planning. He explained that the applicant commits to doing their best to locate nearby offsite parking areas.
Mr. Ryan addressed lot lines and driveway ownership and explained that the most recent revision shows the property line through the center of the driveway, rather than ownership on one side or the other. He noted that this scenario gives both parties (i.e., LCB Senior Living and any future owner of the rear parcel) split responsibility; he added that this scenario is not an uncommon situation and works well. He explained that the owner is still committed to all the easements pertaining to the use of the driveway.
Mr. Starr indicated that while he still feels LCB should own the driveway he noted that he is agreeable to the compromise presented by Mr. Ryan. He commented that driveway ownership is a requirement for residential properties. He communicated his fear that use of the driveway for the assisted living parcel could become a problem at some future point if the rear parcel ran into financial/bankruptcy troubles.
In response to Mrs. Primeau’s question, Mr. Ryan stated that there is approximately 18 feet between the property line and the parking area.
In response to Mr. Starr’s question, Mr. Ryan confirmed that there is enough property/room to handle the maintenance needed for the retaining wall.
Mrs. Ryan noted her appreciation for the additional 6 to 7 parking spaces but added that she is still not thrilled with the parking in general; she noted her concerns with everyday traffic and not just special events. She added that individuals could move in with cars and then shortly thereafter find out they can no longer drive and their car sits there taking up space.
In response to Mrs. Ryan’s concerns, Mr. Puliafico explained, from his experience, that there are only a small number of residents who have cars; less than 5%. He noted that the parking ratio for the 9 properties developed in MA and RI was requested at .5 and was generally accepted by the community and more than sufficient the majority of the time. He explained that the need for overflow parking was always addressed and secured with nearby businesses; he added that LCB Senior Living is very experienced with this issue and that process has been started in Avon. The parking ratio, with the additional 6 to 7 spaces just added, rises to .73 (Hamilton Heights in West Hartford is .61; Greenwich Place in Rocky Hill is .68; Larson Place in Hamden is .47; and Crossroads Place is .73). Mr. Puliafico
stated that he is very comfortable with the numbers being provided in Avon but added that LCB is also very willing to secure additional offsite parking.
Mr. Bonner conveyed his concerns with traffic in the area. He noted that there is nothing wrong with the proposed driveway location, per se, but explained that his concern relates to the driveway in relation to the existing driveway for Riverdale Farms, where there is considerable traffic generation. He asked if a blinking traffic light is a possibility to act as a warning to people that there is a lot of activity in the area. He communicated his concerns for the citizens and the vehicle speeds in the area.
In response to Mr. Bonner’s concerns/comments, Mr. Ryan acknowledged his understanding and explained that signage and lights are up to the State DOT but added that he could bring these concerns to their attention. He added that the State DOT has indicated that they feel that once the slopes are pulled back in the proposed driveway location that that will help the situation, as people may anticipate the driveway.
There being no further input, the public hearing for Apps. #4669 and #4670 was closed.
App. #4672 - Amber and Brian Rush, owners, Morgan Contracting, Inc., applicant, request for Special Exception under Section IV.A.4.q. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit accessory apartment, 79 Carriage Drive, Parcel 1680079, in an R40 Zone
Dan Morgan, Morgan Contracting, was present.
Mr. Morgan explained that the proposal is to add an in-law apartment/addition to the rear of the existing house.
In response to Mr. Starr’s questions, Mr. Morgan confirmed that the primary entrance would be through the main house but there will also be a secondary entrance via the back deck. He noted that the lower level is crawl space only, not living space.
Mr. Morgan submitted, for the record, 3 letters of support from neighbors.
There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4672 was closed.
App. #4673 - Leibert Real Estate, owner, Maureen Callahan, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VII.C.4.b.(2) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit low-profile detached identification sign,192 West Main Street, Parcel 4540192, in a CR Zone
Present were Tim and Maureen Callahan (Rosie’s Laundry), applicants.
Mr. Callahan explained that the request is to replace the existing detached sign with a directory-style detached sign to identify the businesses; the proposed sign is 18 SF.
Mr. Starr asked if all the problems with banners and temporary signage will go away.
Mr. Callahan confirmed that the temporary signage will end.
Mr. Kushner noted that the list of sign violations for non compliance is quite long. He recommended that a condition noting compliance with temporary sign regulations be added if an approval is being considered; a special exception approval would be in jeopardy if the sign regulations are violated. Mr. Callahan noted his understanding.
Mr. Starr commented that an approval could be granted for a 2-year time period noting that any violations of the sign regulations would negate the approval. Mr. Kushner concurred.
In response to Mr. Bonner’s question, Mr. Callahan indicated that the lighting is from the ground, lit from the front projected onto the sign; it will be shielded with no glare.
There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4673 was closed.
App. #4675 - Twenty Security Drive LLC, owner, Capitol Region Education Council, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VI.G.3.e. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit extension of temporary elementary public school use, 20 Security Drive, Parcel 3900020, in an IP Zone
Also heard at this time but not part of the public hearing:
App. #4674 Twenty Security Drive LLC, owner, Capitol Region Education Council, applicant, request for Site Plan Modification to permit extension for temporary elementary
public school, 20 Security Drive, Parcel 3900020, in an IP Zone
Present were David Hoopes, Mayo and Crowe, on behalf of the applicant; Mark Greenburg, owner; and Don Walsh, Deputy Executive Director, Capitol Regional Education Council (CREC).
Don Walsh explained that the request is to allow CREC to occupy the building on a temporary basis for an additional 3 years. He noted that the number of students will remain the same and added that no further requests for extensions will be made. He indicated that students currently at 20 Security Drive will move into their permanent school now being constructed at 59 Waterville in December 2013. He noted that there have been no complaints regarding 20 Security Drive; there are good relationships with the corporate neighbors. He stressed that while 20 Security Drive does not make sense as a permanent school location, a 3-year extension for temporary use would provide the students and staff with a good learning environment. The school that would relocate to 20 Security Drive during this 3-year
extension is a Pre-K through Grade 5 School located in Bloomfield that will outgrow its current temporary facility in June of 2014. Mr. Walsh explained that CREC is currently in conversations with Avon Public Schools regarding subleasing of some of CRECs Pre-K classrooms and noted that CREC will do everything possible to help Avon schools. He noted that if subleasing occurs, the number of students will not exceed the approved number of 435. The students from Bloomfield would occupy 20 Security Drive in the summer/August of 2013; no renovations are necessary as the building has already been fit out for Pre-K through Grade 5. Mr. Walsh concluded by noting that a number of sites in this area are being investigated for the construction of a new school; the site will not be in Avon.
In response to Mr. Bonner’s concern, Mr. Walsh stated that CREC buses do not travel Route 44 over Avon Mountain.
In response to Mrs. Primeau’s question, Mr. Walsh explained that CREC only provides transportation for Avon students. He noted that there are 30 children from Avon who attend the Reggio School; the Town of Avon buses these 30 children and CREC provides bussing for all other students from other districts. Mrs. Primeau noted that she has seen some of the small buses traveling over Avon Mountain and added that she has followed them to 20 Security Drive. She asked that CREC reaffirm that no buses will travel over Avon Mountain. Mr. Walsh confirmed that he will take care of it.
In response to Mr. Kushner’s question, Mr. Walsh offered assurances that 3½ years is more time than is needed to find a site and construct a new school. He reiterated that CREC will not come back to ask for another extension and added that he feels CREC will be out of the building at 20 Security Drive before a 3-year extension expires.
There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4675 was closed, as well as the entire public hearing.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Mrs. Primeau motioned to waive Administrative Procedure #6 and consider the public hearing items. Mr. Bonner seconded the motion that received unanimous approval.
App. #4669 - Avon Village, LLC, owner, Avon Village, LLC, and LCB Senior Living, LLC, applicants, request for 2-lot Subdivision, 11.0 acres, 117 and 121 Simsbury Road, Parcels 3970117 and 3970121, in a CP-A Zone
App. #4670 - Avon Village, LLC, owner, Avon Village, LLC, and LCB Senior Living, LLC, applicants, request for Special Exception under Section VI.E.3.b. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit 74-unit assisted living facility, 117 Simsbury Road, Parcel 3970117, in a CP-A Zone
App. #4671 - Avon Village, LLC, owner, Avon Village, LLC, and LCB Senior Living, LLC, applicants, request for Site Plan approval to permit assisted living facility, 117 Simsbury Road, Parcel 3970117 in a CP-A Zone
Mrs. Primeau motioned to approve Apps. #4669, #4670, and #4671 with the following conditions:
1. Drawing SP-3A, revised to July 15, 2013, shows 9 reserve parking spaces; these 9 spaces shall be constructed.
2. LCB Senior Living shall secure offsite parking from a nearby property for 20 vehicles for special events. A contract shall be entered into and submitted to the Town prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
3. The property/subdivision line defining the property line in common with the remaining property to be retained by Avon Village, LLC, shall be as depicted on Drawing SP-3A. Agreements which clearly assign rights to utilize the driveway and maintenance responsibilities shall be recorded in the Avon Land Records prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
4. Detailed architectural drawings shall be provided to Town Staff/Director of Planning for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Mrs. Ryan seconded the motion that received unanimous approval.
App. #4672 - Amber and Brian Rush, owners, Morgan Contracting, Inc., applicant, request for Special Exception under Section IV.A.4.q. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit accessory apartment, 79 Carriage Drive, Parcel 1680079, in an R40 Zone
Mrs. Primeau motioned to approve App. #4672. The motion, seconded by Mrs. Ryan, received unanimous approval.
App. #4673 - Leibert Real Estate, owner, Maureen Callahan, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VII.C.4.b.(2) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit low-profile detached identification sign,192 West Main Street, Parcel 4540192, in a CR Zone
Mrs. Primeau motioned to approve App. #4673 subject to the following conditions:
1. A substantial number of temporary sign violations for this applicant have been documented by the Zoning Enforcement Officer. Applicant has represented that they will fully comply with temporary signage regulations. Should there be any documented sign violations by this applicant/tenant within the 2-year period following this approval, this permit/approval shall be void.
2. External lighting shall be shielded, so as not to produce glare.
The motion, seconded by Mr. Bonner, received unanimous approval.
App. #4674 Twenty Security Drive LLC, owner, Capitol Region Education Council, applicant, request for Site Plan Modification to permit extension for temporary elementary public school, 20 Security Drive, Parcel 3900020, in an IP Zone
App. #4675 - Twenty Security Drive LLC, owner, Capitol Region Education Council, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VI.G.3.e. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit extension of temporary elementary public school use, 20 Security Drive, Parcel 3900020, in an IP Zone
Mrs. Primeau motioned to approve Apps. #4674 and #4675 subject to the following conditions:
1. This approval is valid for a 3-year time period (January 24, 2014 to January 24, 2017). This approval is an extension of the original approval granted for Apps. #4581/82 for a 2-year time period beginning January 24, 2012.
2. All conditions imposed with Apps. #4581/82 shall remain in effect.
The motion, seconded by Mrs. Ryan, received unanimous approval.
OTHER BUSINESS
“The Local Grill” – new restaurant to replace “Trattoria II Trullo” – Riverdale Farms
Mr. Kushner explained that a new restaurant called “The Local Grill” is going to replace the existing restaurant in Riverdale Farms known as “Trattoria II Trullo” (formerly “Papacelle”). He noted that the new restaurant is very similar to the existing restaurant; the seating count, the bar, and the use of the outdoor patio will all remain the same. He added that there may be some limited outdoor acoustical music but noted that the property owner (Brighenti) has instructed the restaurant owner to keep the noise down.
Mrs. Primeau conveyed her wishes for success with the new restaurant.
Proposed Changes to 2006 Plan of Conservation and Development - Chapter 11 Neighborhood Goals and Policies
Mr. Kushner explained that the proposed language changes pertain to Avon Old Farms School and the proposed relocation/reconstruction of Old Farms Road. He noted that this project has been ongoing for more than 30 years and involves the State DOT and the Federal Highway Administration. He explained that one of the goals of this project involves the preservation of approximately 100 acres of open space along the new road alignment. The objective is to create a balance between making the new road safer while, hopefully, preserving the rural character of the existing road. He explained that in 2008 Richter & Cegan prepared a report/study for Avon Old Farms School; the property is currently zoned EL (Educational Land) but the report looks at different types of subdivision layouts/scenarios should
the School wish/need to sell some land and request the property to be rezoned. He added that while the School has indicated that they have no interest at this point in time in selling any property he noted that the “Devonwood” subdivision in Farmington occupies land once owned by Avon Old Farms School. The Town has great interest in preserving all this acreage as open space, if at all possible. He noted that several years ago real estate appraisals were done by both the Town and the School but nothing advanced past that.
Mr. Kushner explained that normally special planning studies are done in these types of situations but further explained that because the School had a large costly study done in 2008 it didn’t seem necessary to go through the standard steps normally undertaken, such as inventorying/assessing topography, natural resources, flood plain, and wetlands.
Mr. Kushner reviewed/summarized the proposed language changes/additions:
Chapter 11 Neighborhood Goals and Policies
Neighborhood 6
- This neighborhood contains the largest remaining tract of undeveloped land in Avon and is owned by the Avon Old Farms School. These parcels are of high priority for acquisition by the town. The town should continue to pursue negotiations to purchase this land in order to preserve it as open space. Additional options which would also have the effect of maintaining this land as open space include acquisition of development rights or dedication of a conservation easement.
- A design for the reconstruction of Old Farms Road is being finalized. A new alignment for a section of the road in the vicinity of the school campus will shift the road to the south. (See Map 11, Plan of Circulation) This will provide an opportunity to define a new “core campus” northerly of the new alignment. See area shaded in blue on the Future Land Use Plan contained in the pocket of this report.
Any development of property owned by the school would first require a change of zone. Commercial or industrial uses are not appropriate here. Low density residential development would be the most appropriate. Because of the availability of public water and sewer there is a unique opportunity to develop a carefully planned cluster development. This would provide an opportunity
preserve significant areas of open space. The construction of a modest number of multi-family, active adult or congregate care housing units may also be appropriate at a density which would be equivalent to that of a low density single-family subdivision. At a minimum, a corridor of open space along Old Farms Road should be preserved.
Add the following text:
In 2008 Avon Old Farms School commissioned Richter & Cegan, landscape architects, to prepare a master plan study. This study depicts the relocation of Old Farms Road to the south; an area to expand “Core Campus” facilities, should the School choose to do so, and analyzes the potential for single-family residential development. The largest block of land owned by the School is south of Old Farms Road and south of the proposed relocated roadway. It is in excess of 350 acres. The Richter & Cegan study presents two development scenarios; one follows R40 guidelines and the second follows RU2A guidelines. Should the School need to sell some or all of this property in the future, a more desirable outcome would result from the development of this property in a compact clustered
manner versus a conventional large-lot subdivision. Division of this property into conventional single-family house lots would result only in the preservation of 10% of the property as open space. Development in a more compact fashion could result in preserving 50% or more of this property as open space with an overall impact that would be comparable to a conventional single-family subdivision. Commercial or office development is not appropriate.
A portion of the Old Farms School property is shown on the Water Pollution Control Authority’s Master Sewer Facilities Plan as being eligible for future sewer. Opportunities exist to expand the sewer service area for a substantial portion of additional areas located south of Old Farms Road, as well. Recent revisions to the State Plan of Conservation and Development include language to make it possible for the State to conclude that sewer service to this area is consistent with State goals, where development will occur in a compact manner, resulting in the preservation of more open space than would result in comparison to a conventional single-family subdivision served with onsite septic systems.
To accommodate this type of development, the Commission should amend the EL (educational land) zoning regulations to allow, by special permit, compact residential developments. These developments can take the form of single-family homes on small individual lots or on land owned in fee or in common; rental apartments; housing for the elderly; assisted living facilities; or other housing types which the Commission may deem appropriate. A formula should be established within the Regulations defining “equivalency factors”; this formula should compare the impact of one single-family home to other housing types. Variables to consider include traffic generation, building mass, and lot coverage. Using this methodology, a proposed project may be compared to a single-family subdivision
developed at a density of .6 to .8 units per acre. The School should, at a minimum, always retain ownership of enough land area in the vicinity of the School’s campus to comply with a ratio of 35% lot coverage to 65% green space (standard for institutional uses).
A substantial corridor of open space should be preserved connecting the Farmington Valley Greenway with the Fisher Farm and Fisher Meadows, town-owned properties. In addition, building orientations shall be such that a wooded streetscape is preserved. Such a layout will also benefit Avon Old Farms School by preserving a more rural landscape in the vicinity of the existing campus structures plus any expansion of the campus to the south.
Mr. Kushner explained that the first 2 paragraphs exist in the 2006 Plan and would remain the same. The text to be deleted is shown as struck through and the new text proposed to be added is shown in bold. He further explained that while there have been some discussions on and off by the School to expand the campus, (i.e., possibly add a girl’s campus and/or add younger children), there is no plan and no decisions have been made to date. He referenced the aforementioned 2008 Richter & Cegan study and noted that the largest block of land the School owns, approximately 350 acres, is located south of the proposed new road alignment. The Study analyzes 2 development scenarios; one scenario notes the property being rezoned to R40 (residential) from EL (educational land)
resulting in a subdivision similar to Stony Corners and one scenario rezones the land to RU2A (residential 2 acre minimum). Mr. Kushner explained that the R40 zone would most likely be the most appropriate, as the land most proximate to the School is currently zoned R40. Mr. Kushner indicated that if the property is to be sold and cannot be preserved as open space, for whatever reason, a more desirable alternative would be to permit development of clustered single-family homes, condominiums, apartments, and assisted living facilities, rather than single-family conventional homes. He added that equivalency factors/values would need to be determined (i.e., one unit of conventional housing vs. one unit of assisted living) and how the impacts compare. He explained that the study discusses the possibility of not rezoning the property bur rather consider a text amendment to the Zoning Regulations to make it possible for the School, or new owner of some or all of
the property, to apply for a special permit to allow an alternative housing development. The text amendment states that the goal is to preserve as much as 50% of the property as open space.
Mr. Starr suggested that the words “50% or” be taken out of the proposed language:
“Development in a more compact fashion could result in preserving 50% or more of this property as open space….”. Mr. Kushner concurred.
Mrs. Primeau suggested that any reference to Richter & Cegan should be taken out and the business that performed the study should be referred to as “landscape architects”. Mr. Kushner concurred.
Mr. Kushner commented that more input may be received over the summer and a public hearing considered for sometime in the fall. The Commission concurred.
In response to comments and questions from unidentified audience members, Mr. Kushner explained that the proposed language changes just discussed are not connected in any way to proposed development on Lenox Road, at the end of Haynes Road.
In response to comments/concerns from the audience regarding increased traffic, Mr. Kushner explained/clarified that the text amendment just discussed is not directly involved or intended to facilitate whether or not Old Farms Road gets relocated or reconstructed. He further explained that the “Circulation Plan” contained in the 1968 Plan of Conservation and Development shows Old Farms Road being relocated to approximately the same location being discussed currently. He pointed out that the proposed text changes are not to modify the recommendations for Old Farms Road bur rather are to find a creative solution that doesn’t exist right now in the event
Old Farms School decides, at some point, that they need to sell excess land.
In response to questions/concerns from an audience member about the possibility of not making a road connection between Lenox Road and Haynes Road, Mr. Starr explained that the update process for the Plan of Conservation and Development happens every 10 years.
Mr. Kushner further explained that the appropriate time to begin a discussion regarding such a road connection would be in the fall when a new application is expected to be submitted by the developer. He stated that a public hearing is needed to make any changes to the Plan of Conservation and Development; a minimum of 65 to 90 days, from today, would be needed to change the Plan. He concluded by noting that the intent of the Plan is not to compromise anyone’s quality of life but rather is to balance the private property rights of all land owners.
Mr. Kushner concluded by noting that the Commission prepares a “Plan of Circulation”, in accordance with State law, that largely relates to public safety; the Commission takes their charge seriously.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Sadlon, Clerk
LEGAL NOTICE
TOWN OF AVON
At a meeting held on July 16, 2013, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon voted as follows:
App. #4669 - Avon Village, LLC, owner, Avon Village, LLC, and LCB Senior Living, LLC, applicants, request for 2-lot Subdivision, 11.0 acres, 117 and 121 Simsbury Road, Parcels 3970117 and 3970121, in a
CP-A Zone APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
App. #4670 - Avon Village, LLC, owner, Avon Village, LLC, and LCB Senior Living, LLC, applicants, request for Special Exception under Section VI.E.3.b. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit 74-unit assisted living facility, 117 Simsbury Road, Parcel 3970117, in a CP-A Zone APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
App. #4671 - Avon Village, LLC, owner, Avon Village, LLC, and LCB Senior Living, LLC, applicants, request for Site Plan approval to permit assisted living facility, 117 Simsbury Road, Parcel 3970117 in a CP-A Zone APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
App. #4672 - Amber and Brian Rush, owners, Morgan Contracting, Inc., applicant, request for Special Exception under Section IV.A.4.q. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit accessory apartment,
79 Carriage Drive, Parcel 1680079, in an R40 Zone APPROVED
App. #4673 - Leibert Real Estate, owner, Maureen Callahan, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VII.C.4.b.(2) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit low-profile detached identification sign,192 West Main Street, Parcel 4540192, in a CR Zone APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
App. #4674 - Twenty Security Drive LLC, owner, Capitol Region Education Council, applicant, request for Site Plan Modification to permit extension for temporary elementary public school, 20 Security Drive, Parcel 3900020, in an IP Zone APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
App. #4675 - Twenty Security Drive LLC, owner, Capitol Region Education Council, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VI.G.3.e. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit extension of temporary elementary public school use, 20 Security Drive, Parcel 3900020, in an IP Zone APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
Dated at Avon this 17TH day of July, 2013. Copy of this notice is on file in the Office of the Town Clerk, Avon Town Hall.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Duane Starr, Chair
Linda Keith, Vice-Chair
| 
