TOWN OF EAST WINDSOR
Planning and Zoning Commission
Public Hearing #1461
September 13, 2005
***** Draft Document - Subject to Commission Approval *******
(Second File Submission - Original File Damaged)
The meeting was called to order at 7:31 P. M. by Chairman Guiliano in the Meeting Room of the Town Hall, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, CT.
ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM:
A quorum was established as and Regular Members (Filipone, Guiliano, Rodrigue and Saunders) and two Alternate Members (Kehoe and Ouellette) were present. Regular Member Gowdy and Alternate Member Tyler were absent. Chairman Guiliano noted Alternate Commissioner Ouellette would sit in on Norton Farms; Alternate Commissioner Kehoe will sit in on any new Hearings/Items of Business. Also present was Town Planner Whitten.
ADDED AGENDA ITEMS: None.
RECEIPT OF APPLICATIONS:
1 Application of Kathleen A. Boucher for a renewal of previously approved Special Use Permit to add 5 more dogs to existing doggie day care business located at 62 Harrington Road. [A-1 Zone; Map 17, Block 30, Lot 17].
2. Application of Plantation Properties, LLC for Site Plan Approval for 8,500 sq. ft. industrial building addition at 47 Plantation Road. [M-1 Zone; Map 40, Block 49, Lot 7A].
3. Application of M & L Development Corporation for a Special Use Permit to allow 18-unit condominium project located at 94 South Main Street (the Settlement at Mason’s Brook), owned by M & L Development Corporation and John F. Burnham. [SDD Zone; Map 28, Block 5, Lots 46, 47, & 48].
4. Application of Steven D. Knibloe for Modification of approved Site Plan to allow Community Hall expansion at Park Hill Elderly Housing, owned by East Windsor Housing Authority. [SDD Zone; Map 25/26, Block 37, Lot 38].
5. Application of Jason Roy for a Special Use Permit for Dealer/Repairer License at
80-82 South Main Street, owned by VMC Realty Inc., c/o Vito Cortese [TZ5 Zone; Map 28, Block 5, Lot 44].
6. Application of Victory Outreach Ministries, Inc., for Site Plan Review and Special Use Permit to allow a 41-unit condominium housing development in a Special Development District, located at 329 Scantic Road. [A-1 Zone; Map #39, Block #34, Lot #s 61 & 62].
7. Application of Chapman Properties, LLC for a text amendment to the Zoning Regulations, Section 8A.10.2.2 involving unit mix percentages.
8. Application of Chapman Properties, LLC for a Special Use Permit to allow a 220-unit apartment complex –- known as Mansions on the Scantic – a Special Development District, located on the east side of North Road, at the intersection of Yosky Road. [A-1/A-2 Zone; Map #9, Block #36, Lot #46].
9. Application of Phoenix Farm Company, LLC for Site Plan Approval and Special Use Permit to allow a Planned Residential Development of 192 units of residential apartments in nine buildings, known as River Place. Property is located on the east side of South Water Street, approximately 410 feet from So. Main St. (Rte 5.). [R-3 Zone; Map 13, Block #5, Lot #35].
10. Application of M & L Development Corp. for a text amendment to Section 8A. 10.6.2 of the Zoning Regulations involving Open Space Requirements.
11. Application of Lawrence Tribble, Jr. for Site Plan Approval to allow a dining area addition to existing Corner house Family Restaurant, located at 75 South Main Street. [TZ5 Zone; Map #28, Block #20, Lot #1].
LEGAL NOTICE:
The following Legal Notice, which appeared in the Journal Inquirer on Thursday, September 1, 2005, and Thursday, September 8, 2005, was read by Secretary Saunders:
* Proposed text amendment to the East Windsor Zoning and Subdivision Regulations for a 9-month moratorium on residential development: add Section 21 to the East Windsor Zoning Regulations and add Section 13 to the East Windsor Subdivision Regulations, both regarding moratoria.
PERFORMANCE BONDS – ACTIONS; PERMIT EXTENSIONS: Anchor Engineering Services, Inc. – Request for extension of Special use Permit for Excavation of property located on Wapping Road owned by Anna S. Maslak and NORCAP, Inc.
Chairman Guiliano read the description of this Item of Business. Appearing to discuss
This request was Denise Lord, of Anchor Engineering.
Ms. Lord reported she is appearing this evening to request an extension to the Special Use Permit; this is the last phase of 3 phases of the ongoing operation on this 14.6 acre parcel. Ms. Lord indicated they have been before the Inland/Wetlands Commission and have received a 1 year extension on 8/3/2005. Town Engineer Norton has reviewed the plans and had no additional comments. Ms. Lord indicated they are requesting a 1 year extension to complete the work.
Commissioner Filipone questioned why they need another year? Ms. Lord suggested they should be wrapping the work up in another couple of months. Chairman Guiliano advised Ms. Lord that the last time Mark Zessin appeared before the Commission he was told to not to come back for another extension. Ms. Lord indicated she was not aware of that information. Chairman Guiliano suggested he feels the Commission has given the Applicant enough time to complete their operation; if the Commission is in agreement he will recommend an extension to May as you will not be able to do much work in the Winter. If the project isn’t completed by that time the Commission will consider going after the bond. Commissioner Filipone questioned if the bond was in place? Town Planner Whitten
replied affirmatively. Chairman Guiliano requested Town Planner Whitten check to see that the bond amount was enough to cover the cost to complete this proposed work.
MOTION TO APPROVE an extension through April 30, 2006 for a Special Permit for Excavation on property owned by Anna S. Maslak and known as Assessors Map 41, Block 65, Lot 31, application of Dennis Botticello. This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans as may be modified, and the following conditions:
1. Final plans submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate design professionals responsible for preparation of the plans.
2. All conditions of the July 8, 1997 approval shall remain in effect.
3. A copy of the final approved motion shall be filed by the applicant, on the land records prior to the Commission signing the final plans.
4. Extension shall expire on 4/30/2006.
Filipone moved/Rodrigue seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Kehoe/Rodrigue/Saunders
PERFORMANCE BONDS – ACTIONS; PERMIT EXTENSIONS: M & L Development, 94 South Main Street – Establish new effective date for Zone Change (from TZ5 – SDD – Granted on 7/26/05):
Chairman Guiliano read the description of this Item of Business. Appearing to discuss this request was Attorney T. Mark Barbieri.
Attorney Barbieri suggested the regulations state that a Zone Change must be filed on the effective date, but it wasn’t signed on by that date. They are asking for a 2 week extension so the Commission can sign the motion as required.
MOTION TO APPROVE NEW EFFECTIVE DATE for Zone Change from TZ5 to SDD for M & L Development, 94 South Main Street - previously granted on 7/25/2005 and extended to 9/27/2005.
Filipone moved/Rodrigue seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Kehoe/Rodrigue/Saunders
PERFORMANCE BONDS – ACTIONS; PERMIT EXTENSIONS: Bruce P. Fader – Request for 90-day extension for filing of mylars for Hemlock Court, Phase II.
Chairman Guiliano read the description of this Item of Business.
Town Planner Whitten advised the Commission the Applicant is still working on the easements to the Town with regard to this subdivision. The date for filing the mylars expires on 10/2/2005; they are requesting a 90 day extension which would run through 12/31/2005.
MOTION TO GRANT REQUEST for a 90 day extension for filing mylars for Hemlock Court, Phase II as requested on behalf of the applicant by Bruce P. Fader; extension to run through 12/31/2005.
Filipone moved/Kehoe seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Kehoe/Rodrigue/Saunders
CONTINUED HEARINGS: Letourneau Builders – Special Use Permit for a 54-unit Active Adult Housing development (Norton Fields) located on the west side of Rye Street [R-2 Zone; Map 31, Block 40, Lot 17]. (Deadline to close hearing extended to 9/13/05):
Chairman Guiliano read the Hearing description. LET THE RECORD SHOW Commissioner Ouellette will sit in on this Hearing, as he did during previous meetings.
Appearing to discuss this Application was Attorney T. Mark Barbieri, representing the
Applicants, the Letourneau brothers, who are present in the audience; Sandy Aeschliman,
of Aeschliman Land Surveying; and David Speers, Traffic Engineer, of DLS Consulting.
Chairman Guiliano reported the Commission and the Applicant will be discussing only one thing this evening; Attorney Barbieri concurred. A question had come at the previous meeting regarding the sight lines on Norton Road and Rye Street.
Mr. Aeschliman stepped forward, and apologized to Commissioner Ouellette and the Commission, noting he had incorrectly interpreted the design and the posted speeds. He indicated that the design speed for a subdivision is usually the same as the posted speed. For this proposal there is no design speed so he used a 48 percentile. Mr. Aeschliman recalled that Commissioner Ouellette had noted there is a dip in Norton Road looking south from the proposed site, and he was concerned that someone exiting the site would lose sight of a car coming from that direction. Mr. Aeschliman reported he has reviewed this with Town Engineer Norton; there is a memo from Town Engineer Norton indicating he is taking no exceptions to the Sightline Plan. Commissioner Ouellette and Mr.
Aeschliman discussed the placement of the sightline; Commissioner Ouellette advised Chairman Guiliano he is satisfied with Mr. Aeschliman’s comments. Town Planner Whitten noted Town Engineer Norton has submitted a memo dated 9/7/2005 indicating he is satisfied with the plans and sightlines as well.
Chairman Guiliano noted this is still an open Public Hearing; he noted if any members of
the audience has something to say regarding the sight line issue they may speak. No one requested to comment.
Chairman Guiliano requested a motion to close the Public Hearing.
MOTION TO CLOSE the Public Hearing on the Application of Letourneau Builders for a Special Use Permit for 54-unit Active Adult Housing development (Norton Fields) located on the west side of Rye Street [R-2 Zone; Map 31, Block 40, Lot 17]. Note that under this Application the number of units is now 33, not 54.
Filipone moved/Rodrigue seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Ouellette/Rodrigue/Saunders
Chairman Guiliano noted one of the Commission members who has been present for all the Hearings on this Application is not present this evening; he would rather not take action tonight as he felt it was important to have that member present for the decision.
MOTION TO TABLE the Application of Letourneau Builders for a Special Use Permit for 54-unit Active Adult Housing development (Norton Fields) located on the west side of Rye Street [R-2 Zone; Map 31, Block 40, Lot 17] until the Commission’s regularly scheduled meeting on 9/27/2005 at 7:30 P. M. in the Town Hall Meeting Room, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, CT. Note that under this Application the
number of units is now 33, not 54.
Filipone moved/Rodrigue seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Ouellette/Rodrigue/Saunders
Chairman Guiliano noted Commissioners Rodrigue and Kehoe have each missed one Hearing regarding this Application; he requested that they review the Meeting Minutes in case Commissioner Gowdy is not present at the next Commission Meeting.
CONTINUED HEARINGS: KF Realty, LLC – Special Use Permit for Planned Residential Development (Farnham Estates) for 8 lots, including Special Use Permit for rear lots, located at 247 Rye Street, owned by Randy A. and Linda L. Moore [R-3 & A-2 Zones; Map 35, Block 49, Lot 22]. (Deadline to close hearing extended to 9/13/05):
Chairman Guiliano read the Hearing description. Town Planner Whitten noted the Applicant has requested an extension; Chairman Guiliano READ FOR THE RECORD letter dated 9/13/2005 from Attorney Harold R. Cummings, representing KF Realty, LLC.
MOTION TO APPROVE EXTENSION for the Public Hearing on the Application of KF Realty LLC - Special Use Permit for Planned Residential Development (Farnham Estates) for 8 lots, including Special Use Permit for 2 rear lots, located at 247 Rye Street, owned by Randy A. and Linda L. Moore. [R-3 & A-2 Zones; Map 35, Block 49, Lot 22] until the Commission’s regularly scheduled meeting on 10/11/2005 at 7:30 P. M. in the Town Hall Meeting Room, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, CT.
Filipone moved/Saunders seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Kehoe/Rodrigue/Saunders
NEW HEARING: Proposed Text Amendment to the East Windsor Zoning and Subdivision Regulations for a 9-month moratorium on residential development; add Section 21 to the East Windsor Zoning Regulations and add Section 13 to the East
Windsor Subdivision regulations, both regarding moratoria:
Chairman Guiliano read the Hearing description. LET THE RECORD SHOW
Commissioner Kehoe will sit in on this Item of Business.
Town Planner Whitten opened discussion regarding the consideration of setting a moratorium on residential development; she noted there is a concern there won’t be any building lots or any work for contractors should this moratorium be enacted. She indicated there are presently 75 single family lots approved and not yet completed
without any new applications that have come into her office today, or during the last month. She further noted there are 147 condos/Active Adult Housing units still available to be built. Town Planner Whitten noted the following pending applications: 18 condominium units (Settlement at Mason’s Brook), 220 multi-family housing units (Mansions on the Scantic), 196 multi-family units at South Water Street (Phoenix Farms), 16 condominium units (phase III at Scantic Glen). She suggested this shows there is a lot of property to be developed without approving any more applications during the moratorium; there will be work available.
With regard to residential dwellings, Town Planner Whitten suggested 516 residential units were approved in 2005, with the potential for over 700+ units, vs. 33 residential units approved last year.
Town Planner Whitten referenced the handout regarding Conventional vs. Cluster Subdivision, noting it depicts 2 different development scenarios for the same property. She suggested that the current regulations sort of allow the Cluster Subdivision, but need to be revised to clarify requirements and density factors more clearly, and to get ensure that the town gets meaningful open space with a proposal.
Commissioner Filipone questioned if there is a true written definition of Open Space? He suggested that unless open space is owned by the town or is in a land trust it’s not really open space, and the land can be built on. Town Planner Whitten discussed passive vs. active open space, noting the National Resources Committee is working on that definition now.
Chairman Guiliano opened discussion to the audience:
Bill Loos, Melrose Road, Broad Brook: agrees with the moratorium, thinks the Commission should take time to study the regulations. He objects to the Commission hiring an outside consultant for $17,000; he feels the Commission has enough expertise to do them themselves. He feels Town Planner Whitten knows what is needed for open space. Chairman Guiliano respectfully disagreed, noting he has been on the Commission for 10 years and has worked with 3 or 4 planners and they still have not finished the revisions proposed. The Commission hasn’t been able to hold Work Sessions since Town Planner Whitten came in. Chairman Guiliano suggested the Commissioners are not experts, while Town Planner Whitten is she has so much other business to contend with. She’s noted the Applications currently pending, and those still to come through. If the Town can get a consultant to do the review the regulations and propose revisions it’s a benefit to the Town. Chairman Guiliano noted there are
some regulation changes the
Commission can work with, but the consultant can assist with those sections that have been misinterpreted or have not been resolved.
Bob Norton, Windsorville: reported he has property and doesn’t feel the town needs a moratorium; the real estate market is getting soft, tbe density factors would cut the value
of the property in half. The value of the land is his retirement. Mr. Norton feels the Commission is against bringing in more people; you need people to go into the stores. He feels you need time to do things you should have done before; he’s not saying Town Planner Whitten didn’t do her job but maybe the guy before her.
Chairman Guiliano suggested land uses and times change and the regulations must change with them; we must keep up with them. With regard to Mr. Norton’s comment that the Commission is against building he noted they have approved over the past year 700+ units; that doesn’t indicate they are against building.
Karen Boutin: reported she lives on Windsorville Road and it has become a highway because of all the new houses, they have had one bad accident already, it’s a bad curve near Charbonneau’s pit. Chairman Guiliano suggested if you own a property and want to develop it and you meet the regulations the Commission can’t deny an application...
Robert O’Connell, 241 South Water Street: reported he is President of River Ridge, South Water Street is a road with a 25 mph speed limit, it’s used for a cut through. He understands they are proposing 190 units in that area; he feels there should be a moratorium.
Bill Grace, Warehouse Point: reported he spent much time on the Planning and Zoning Commission many years ago, and he is one of the people who didn’t get the job done; he doesn’t believe the job can be done by a totally volunteer commission. He agrees we need a moratorium, and agrees that East Windsor wants to stay rural. People are talking about needing people but what does it cost for primary education now? Chairman Guiliano suggested it was $8,000. Mr. Grace cited the cost of subdivision infrastructures and Town services, and the Building Inspector and the Town Engineer; he feels it’s a wonderful idea to have a moratorium and get the regulations in place. Something always comes up, it was the condos, now it’s the Active Adult Housing;
the Commission needs time to sort through the regulations.
Jim Richards, 43 Rockville Road, representing the East Windsor Chamber: urges the Commission not to go to a moratorium for residential development. East Windsor has land near I-91, and we’re near Buckland Hills; the moratorium will only delay growth. He suggested if there was this flood of applications some might be hastily reviewed. The Chamber feels Active Adult Housing/55 and over is one of the best tax generators. They are popular now; real estate values are at unprecedented highs; land
owners shouldn’t be denied high values for their land.
Joe Norton, 230 Rye Street: he is against the moratorium, he’s a 5th generation farmer, no one his age is farming, it’s hard and dirty. He understands everyone likes open space, it’s a commercial venture. Would you prevent Walmart from subdividing if
they moved out? Chairman Guiliano suggested that everyone in this room would like to keep the farms but they understand that’s not going to happen. The Commission is
looking at open space within developments. Mr. Norton felt that when you speak of open space that’s the same as eminent domain to him; there is restitution to the owners, but nothing for the farmer. If you can’t get the regulation changes done in 10 years what makes you think you can get it done in 9 months? Is there a cap on it? Chairman Guiliano indicated the Commission could extend the timeframe or shorten it. Town Planner Whitten suggested it’s highly unlikely that it would be extended. Chairman Guiliano concurred that no one on the Board wanted to go more than 9 months.
Mr. Norton questioned that if you had a 28 acre parcel and you wanted to build houses under the moratorium you would be allowed to do that, but if you wanted to move it to a developer you couldn’t. It needs to apply evenly to everyone, not just the ones with large property owners. Chairman Guiliano suggested he was sorry if it comes across that way. An unidentified individual from the audience suggested the farmers could put their farmland in the State program. Chairman Guiliano indicated the Commission was not talking about that, they are talking about a possible moratorium and regulation changes the people, the town, and the builders can understand.
Betty Moshack, 46 Stoughton Road: agreed with the comments made.
MOTION: To TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
Filipone moved/Rodrigue seconded/VOTE: In Favor: Unanimous
The Commission RECESSED at 8:30 and RECONVENED at 8:35 P. M.
Al Grant, 128 Melrose Road: is in favor of the moratorium, we have a volunteer board working against lawyers, we need to work on an even level with regard to what we want to accomplish, not what they want. And the farmer that wants to farm should be able to do so without selling to developers. We should have a good Comprehensive Plan.
................ Sneider, Sullivan Farms Road: is in favor of a moratorium, things shouldn’t be going so fast it outgrows the police and other services the town provides; we need to plan for this. We need to have something in place so the town doesn’t become Enfield; he wouldn’t live there.
John Silva, Rockville Road: recently moved here from Hartford to get out of the city and he hopes the town will have time to plan out how to go.
David Flannigan, South Water Street: is in favor of the moratorium, after seeing the application for 192 units on south Water Street, it’s ridiculous. He feels the board will do
the right thing but they need time. Chairman Guiliano noted that application will still go
through even if we decide to have the moratorium as it was submitted to initiating the
moratorium.
Muriel Wells: is in favor of the moratorium.
Noreen Farmer, South Water Street: fully supports the moratorium, we need to step back. Ms. Farmer questioned if there will be public hearings on that discussion? Chairman Guiliano indicated there will be workshops, as was done with the Plan of Development.
Donna Grant, 128 Melrose Road: is in favor of the moratorium.
Bill Loos: it seems we always come in for Special Use Permits, we need to reduce those. Commissioner Filipone indicated the Commission put the Special Use Permit criteria in place to be able to control things more, if things are allowed under specific regulations there is no limit and they can go on forever. Chairman Guiliano noted that if an application comes through under a Special Use Permit the Commission can choose what’s going in there. If a use fits in a regulation then it can go in anywhere; there are some areas where we need Special Use Permits.
Jim Ferris, South Water Street: how often does the Commission get to do this? Chairman Guiliano indicated twice a month. Mr. Ferris questioned how much they were paid? Chairman Guiliano replied nothing. Mr. Ferris indicated he agrees with the moratorium. Commissioner Filipone noted the Commission was only supposed to meet once a month. Chairman Guiliano noted the Commission started out meeting once a month and then started the regulations 7 years ago and added another meeting for a workshop but as the Town got busier the applications started eating up the meetings, and now the Commission has two meetings to take of the Town meetings.
Mike Holland: is in favor of the regulations being revised but is against the moratorium; it’s a financial hardship for people having things going on and they won’t be able to get anything done in these 9 months. The board members are only part time and maybe should send out the work to professionals, maybe it should go to referendum; there is much influence on people’s future.
Barbara Smiegel, Melrose: has been going to PZC Meeting since 1999, she is in favor of the moratorium. Regarding the constraints of development, you also have the commission to balance the needs of the Town for those that want to develop and those that don’t want to. There are people that wish to develop their land in others ways, there are farmers who want to stay farmers, or residents who want to stay in their residences. Ms. Smiegel doesn’t feel the commission is pro or anti housing, but we need a better balance in the regulations. Commercial development needs to be scrutinized also; we need to have options for historic development preservation, and need to have open space and a definition of what that means. Ms. Smiegel felt that a lot of this
doesn’t get
published to the public at large until it comes into your backyard. She doesn’t want to see anyone loose their economic potential or retirement; if we can take a breath with a new plan we have done everyone a favor. You need this time to do that and you must
focus on it and not be distracted, and look at the Town at large. Ms. Smiegel reported she is in favor of a moratorium.
Susan Ross, 1202 Meadowview: questioned if there was a planned growth rate, such as 5% residential, etc.? Chairman Guiliano indicated the Town really didn’t have a growth plan with regard to commercial vs. residential. Ms. Ross questioned if it all can be developed, or is there a cap? Chairman Guiliano reported there is no cap, the Commission only approved 33 houses last year, and have the potential to approve 700+ this year. He suggested he didn’t believe the Commission had the ability to set a cap on the number of houses or businesses; they can’t stop someone from developing. Commissioner Filipone questioned if CRCOG might have that information? Town Planner Whitten suggested that CRCOG has guidelines for housing diversity, but the Commission can’t say you can’t develop your property because of the percentage for that year. First Selectwoman Roberts, speaking from the audience, suggested we could direct development.
Cathy Bilodeau, 33 Scantic Road: suggested you can’t prohibit someone from using their land if it meets the code; Chairman Guiliano concurred. Ms. Bilodeau questioned isn’t that what a moratorium will do? Chairman Guiliano replied negatively, noting it’s only putting the ability to do that off for 9 months but not at all. Ms. Bilodeau felt the Commission was doing that now.
Rob Rybeck, 225 Rye Street: is in favor of the moratorium. He questioned if 9 months is long enough to catch up on this work and revise the regulations? Chairman Guiliano indicated that’s why the Commission wants to bring in outside help; both the Commission and Town Planner Whitten also have a backlog of things to do. There are a lot of regulations that only need to be brushed up and the Commission can do those, and some really need to be changed, and the Commission is looking for outside help with that but the Commission will be doing a lot of this themselves.
Elzear Rodrigue: what will the outside help cost? Chairman Guiliano indicated they are asking for $17,000. Mr. Rodrigue questioned if that will cover it? Chairman Guiliano replied he hoped so. Mr. Rodrigue questioned if you will be spending another $17,000; will it cover it? Chairman Guiliano indicated the Commission will do a lot of the work themselves. He noted that someone else had said farm it all out but that might cost $125,000 or more.
Rand Stanley, 87 Rye Street: questioned if Chairman Guiliano could tell the public what the two sections would affect; will it affect commercial development? Chairman Guiliano suggested that at this time no, it will not affect commercial development, but the Commission will be looking at the commercial regulations in the future on their own.
Mr. Stanley questioned if there was a thought that there might be a moratorium on commercial in the future? Chairman Guiliano suggested the commercial regulations are
pretty good, although the list of uses need some adjusting. He felt the Commission could make the commercial regulation revisions on their own. Town Planner Whitten suggested the moratorium will add some sections/revisions to the zoning regulations and subdivision regulations. Under the moratorium people would still be able to subdivide two parcels out of an original parcel. Mr. Rodrigue suggested it closes the door a bit on residential development. Town Planner Whitten indicated it did temporarily.
Joe Norton: questioned how many large land owners the Commission thinks it will affect, 35? Chairman Guiliano indicated he didn’t know. Mr. Norton suggested he felt you will have a lawsuit. Chairman Guiliano suggested the town needs to look at the whole picture; this moratorium affects the whole town.
Cathy Bilodeau: questioned what will happen in 9 months if this is not completed and you continue to operate under the current regulations and allow people to come back and then what is the process? Chairman Guiliano the Commission holds public hearings and then adopts the regulations. Ms. Bilodeau questioned that the Commission could go through all this and have people say know? Chairman Guiliano suggested the Commission must hold public hearings. Town Planner Whitten noted the revisions must be referred to CRCOG for review, any changes would be sent back, the Commission holds public hearings to get people’s comments, and the PZC makes the final decision.
Elzear Rodrigue, Rye Street: questioned what specific areas of the zoning regulations are so antiquated that you can’t deal with them, and what is the purpose – to increase lot sizes or lower the density or open space, or a specific area to restrict development? Chairman Guiliano indicated the Commission is not trying to restrict development. Mr. Rodrigue questioned if Chairman Guiliano was saying that the regulations won’t be changed to restrict development any more than now? Chairman Guiliano suggested the Commission may come up with different proportions of houses on a parcel of land, or a different formula. Mr. Rodrigue questioned didn’t Don Poland do that before, work on the density factor? Chairman Guiliano suggested that sometimes
the density factor isn’t clear to some people. Mr. Rodrigue felt the Commission was zeroing in on restricting development of residential properties. Chairman Guiliano felt the Commission is doing what the town wants, concentrating on open space. Mr. Rodrigue questioned how much open space does the town need, you have 700 acres owned by the State on the west side of the Scantic River, you could only develop 25% of the property unless up have sewers, he doesn’t feel that throughout town, even if you tried to develop everything open now, you could get 25% of what’s left. You won’t be able to develop the town to its capacity because of a lock on the sewers and wetlands. Mr. Rodrigue suggested he is seeing a lot of people with signs on their front lawns regarding open space, he cited property on Old Ellington Road, noting that before the homes were built there it was open space but now that the homes are there they
want open space. There are properties on Rye Street that are being developed for 11 building lots. Mr. Rodrigue felt there is a small group of
people speaking to restrict development. Chairman Guiliano suggested it isn’t only open space; this whole open space movement came about because of application for Active
Adult Housing. Mr. Rodrigue suggested the Commission has a cap on Active Adult Housing; don’t approve any more. You have applications for 250 units but there are not all built. Mr. Rodrigue suggested he didn’t feel the Commission has to deal with that any longer. Chairman Guiliano suggested the Commission needs to deal with the regulations. Mr. Rodrigue questioned why hire a consultant for that; he felt the Commission was spending money foolishly. He cited the budget referendums; it’s only for a select few.
Town Planner Whitten noted the regulations call for an open space set aside but the configurations aren’t what the town wants, so we need to work on that. She indicated the Commission wants to make the regulations more flexible so people have a better way of developing their properties, and the regulations are consistent and are easy to read. The regulations need to have an overhaul. There have been many planners and as a result you get piecemeal language. That’s what they are trying to do; this will help developers as well. We’re sitting in public hearing for hours trying to interpret what the regulations say.
Jim Ferris, 241 South Water Street, River Ridge Condominiums: questioned where we go from here, a referendum or getting together? Chairman Guiliano suggested the Commission plans to vote on this issue tonight.
Reverend Saunders, 331 Scantic Road: questioned if the Commission has 2 meetings per month for receiving and going through applications and if you set one aside for the regulations what would be the need for the moratorium? Chairman Guiliano suggested the Commission couldn’t accomplish the regulations review/revisions in 9 months, there would be just 9 meetings for work sessions. He cited the next meeting should be a work session and already the Commission has something scheduled. Reverend Saunders felt if the commission didn’t have a moratorium it wouldn’t have a backlog. Chairman Guiliano suggested that most of the applications were already in the process with Town Planner Whitten before considering the moratorium; maybe 2 or 3 pushed ahead
because of the potential for a moratorium but the majority of the applications were already in the process of being submitted. Reverend Saunders questioned that there were things that need to be made more clear? Chairman Guiliano indicated the Commission needs a break to get things together.
Mike Howell: questioned if you are doing service to the town and are having problems why are you on the board, or the chairman? Chairman Guiliano suggested that he couldn’t see that 6 to 9 months will affect things so much that people will be destitute; you can’t keep putting this off. Commissioner Filipone noted that tonight is the first meeting in 10 years that people are supporting what the Commission is trying to do.
Bill Grace: applications have a time limit and State law requires they be acted on in that
time limit, and if the Commission doesn’t act on them they are automatically accepted – State law dictates.
Bill Loos: the town had 3 referendums, why wasn’t this put in the budget? First Selectwoman Roberts noted the budgets were submitted in February and this wasn’t on the horizon at that time. Chairman Guiliano suggested the Commission kept quiet about considering a moratorium so as to not get a flood of applications.
Barbara Smiegel: questioned if the Commission would use assistance from CRCOG, etc. that are free of charge? Chairman Guiliano suggested the Commission is not going through every single regulation; they couldn’t do that in 9 months. They are going through the problem areas and fixing those and then will work on other things, like historical/village districts so we are able to work towards the Plan of Development recommendations.
……… Grant: are you anticipating any substantial changes in the regulations? Chairman Guiliano replied negatively. Town Planner Whitten suggested their goal is that the regulations will be more easily read.
Chairman Guiliano queried the Commission for comments. Commissioner Rodrigue suggested that speaking as a member of a team, which is what the Commission is, when did you put this together, because he felt the Commission didn’t know about this until July. Chairman Guiliano suggested he and Town Planner Whitten had been discussing this. Commissioner Rodrigue felt the Commission should be working on this to present it; he didn’t find it proposed as a presentation. Chairman Guiliano suggested if word had gotten out that a moratorium was being considered the town would have been flooded with applications. Commissioner Rodrigue felt the town got flooded anyway. He felt a bigger problem is that we didn’t do the work sessions; we need to push off people from
applications if the individual hasn’t gotten through wetlands. Commissioner Filipone suggested we are getting jammed because the surrounding towns are built out – South Windsor, Enfield – the land isn’t going to go anywhere. Commissioner Rodrigue felt it was only a problem when someone challenged the regulations and it’s now a big issue; we’re in a panic mode. Chairman Guiliano suggested the Commission wasn’t in a panic, we’re stepping back and getting our regulations in place. Commissioner Rodrigue felt as a Commissioner, this got pushed through the back door. Chairman Guiliano indicated he didn’t even have anything to hand out to the Commission until the last meeting. Town Planner Whitten questioned if he didn’t hear about this in July? Commissioner Rodrigue replied affirmatively, but noted he didn’t feel this was a team effort.
Chairman Guiliano queried the Commission for any additional comments.
MOTION TO CLOSE the Public Hearing on the Application of the Planning and Zoning Commission for a Proposed Text Amendment to the East Windsor zoning and Subdivision Regulations for a 9-month moratorium on residential
development: add Section 21 to the East Windsor zoning Regulations and add Section 13 to the East Windsor Subdivision regulations, both regarding moratoria.
Filipone moved/Rodrigue seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guliano/Kehoe/Rodrigue/Saunders
MOTION TO SET A NINE MONTH MORATORIUM ON ALL TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AS REFERENCED IN THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT, 9 MONTH MORATORIUM TO BECOME EFFECTIVE 9/16/2005 ON DAY AFTER NOTICE IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER.
TEXT AMENDMENT - ADD SECTION 21 TO EAST WINDSOR ZONING REGULATIONS - MORATORIA: 21.1 - MORATORIUM ON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. ADD SECTION 13 TO THE EAST WINDSOR SUBDIVISION
REGULATIONS - MORATORIA: 13.1 - MORATORIUM ON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The moratorium shall take effect upon publication of the notice of adoption and remain in effect for nine (9) months, or until regulations are adopted, whichever takes place first.
PURPOSE: The Town of East Windsor, as one of the fastest growing towns in Connecticut, has determined that a comprehensive review of the Zoning and Subdivision Regulations must be conducted to assess the goals stated in the Plan of conservation and Development. The East Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission therefore, finds that a temporary, limited moratorium on residential development, residential subdivision, residential re-subdivision and multi-family applications is necessary to allow the Commission time to study and rewrite regulations to provide protection to East Windsor’s natural, scenic, historic and cultural resources, and to meet the goals and recommendations that are set forth in the 2004 Plan of Conservation and Development.
APPLICATION: During the moratorium, no application shall be accepted for Planned Residential Developments (PRD) [Zoning Regulation Section 20]; Active Adult Housing (AAH), Assisted Living Communities (ALC), Managed Residential Communities (MRC) [Zoning Regulation Section 5.1.17]; Special Development Districts (SDD) [Zoning Regulation Section 8A]; Manufactured Mobile Home Parks [Zoning Regulation Section 8B], residential subdivisions; residential re-subdivisions; or residential open space subdivision in any zone.
EXCLUSIONS: The moratorium shall not apply to an application seeking to subdivide or re-subdivide a residential tract of land into a total of three (3) parcels of land (original parcel plus two additional lots), or up to three (3) multi-family
dwelling units, Accessory Apartments, or Residential Rear Lots, or permitted residential development in non residential zones. Any application received before the effective date of the moratorium will be accepted and reviewed under the
current regulations.
Note: A parcel may not be included in more than one subdivision or multi-family application during the moratorium.
Note: Only complete applications will be accepted prior to the commencement of the moratorium. Any application found to be incomplete may not be accepted.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE:
September 13, 2005 Public Hearing
September 14, 2005 Notice filed with Town Clerk in Land Records
September 15, 2005 Notice of Action in paper.
September 16, 2005 Effective Date for commencement.
June 16, 2006 Moratorium ends.
Filipone moved/Kehoe seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Kehoe
Against: Rodrigue/Saunders
Abstained: No one
MOTION TO TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
Filipone moved/Rodrigue seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Kehoe/Rodrigue/Saunders
The Commission RECESSED at 9:35 P. M. and RECONVENED at 9:48 P. M.
NEW BUSINESS: Nextel Communications – Site Plan Approval for 12’ x 20’ equipment shelter and 12 antennas to be mounted on existing water tank located at 104 Prospect Hill Road, owned by CT. Water Company. [M-1 Zone; Map 5, Block 17, Lot
38]. (Deadline for decision 10/13/05):
Chairman Guiliano read the description of this Item of Business. Appearing to discuss the Application was Tom Flynn of Nextel.
Mr. Flynn indicated this is a Site Plan Application to located 12 antennae on the water tank and to put a 12’ x 20’ shelter on the ground to the south of the water tank for Nextel Communications. The water tank is 105’ tall and they will be installing antennae at the 85’ level. Mr. Flynn indicated AT&T already uses the tower and Verizon is planning to share space on the tower with Nextel.
Chairman Guiliano questioned if there was a shed already on the site? Mr. Flynn indicated that shed belongs to AT&T. Chairman Guiliano felt the Commission had
asked them to screen that shed. Mr. Flynn indicated Nextel’s shed would be within a fenced in area.
Commissioner Filipone questioned how far back would the shed be located? Mr. Flynn indicated it would be far off the street. Town Planner Whitten concurred the location is way in the back and is difficult to find. Commissioner Filipone questioned if Town Engineer Norton had reviewed the Site Plan? Town Planner Whitten noted Town Engineer Norton had not voiced any concerns during their discussions. Mr. Flynn suggested the shelter will be built of an aggregate material and can be painted any color.
Town Planner Whitten noted the Town is putting up a tower next to the water tank for a 911 communications tower. Mr. Flynn noted they also looked at using that tower but for PCS or cellular the tower was in the way so the water tank is a better solution.
Chairman Guiliano questioned if Nextel would be attaching the antennae to the existing bands? Mr. Flynn replied it will be banded; everyone is on the same horizontal plane for the 3 users. He indicated from a technical standpoint putting everyone on the same horizontal plan works well.
Commissioner Ouellette questioned if this was under the purview of the State at one time? Chairman Guiliano suggested it goes to the State for the tower location. Mr. Flynn indicated the State regulates the new towers. Chairman Guiliano noted both the State and the Commission/Town would rather see someone use an existing tower. Mr. Flynn noted he appeared in Cheshire last evening regarding using a silo but if someone wanted to use a flagpole that would have to go to the State Siting Committee. Commissioner Filipone recalled the Commission did this same thing before at the fertilizer plant in Broad Brook.
MOTION TO APPROVE the application of Nextel Communications c/o General Dynamics for a site plan approval to install 12 wireless communications antennas upon an existing water tank and associated improvements/facilities at 104 Prospect Hill Road, East Windsor, Connecticut. Property owned by Connecticut Water Co. as shown on Assessors’ Map 5, Block 17 Lot 38 and zoned M-1. This approval is granted subject to conformance with the referenced plans (as may be modified by the conditions) and the following conditions:
Referenced Plans:
- Title Sheet T-1: Nextel Communications of the Mid Atlantic Inc DBA NEXTEL Communications CT-3681A Warehouse Point CT-3681A , 104 Prospect Hill Rd., East Windsor, CT 06088 Prepared by A&E Firm, URS Corporation AES, 500 Enterprise Drive, Rocky Hill, CT 860/529-8882, dated 8/8/05
- Z-1: Partial Site Plan Water Tank Elevation and Details
- Z-2 : Equipment Building Elevations
Conditions that must be met prior to signing of mylars:
1. The applicant shall submit a paper copy of the final approved plans to the Town Planner for review and comment prior to the submission of the final mylars.
2. One set of mylars shall be submitted to the Commission for signature. All plans shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for preparation of the plans. (One paper set of the structural plans shall be submitted for signature.)
3. The conditions of this approval shall be binding upon the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns. A copy of this approval motion shall be filed in the land records prior to the signing of the final mylars.
Conditions which must be met prior to the issuance of any permits:
4. A Zoning Permit for site work must be applied for and approved prior to the start of construction. Two sets of the final approved plans shall be submitted at this time.
5. A detailed sediment and erosion control plan for the entire development shall be submitted at the time of application for the site improvement Zoning Permit. The plan shall include the engineers estimated costs for E&S controls. The Town Engineer will review the plan and cost estimates and will set the E&S bond amount.
6. Additional requirements and procedures may be implemented by the Town Planner.
Conditions which must be met prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy:
7. Site improvements must be completed or bonding in place.
8. Final grading, seeding, landscaping shall be in place or the E&S bond will not be released or reduced.
9. Additional bonding may be required by the Planning Department.
10. All state inspection fees must be paid.
Conditions which must be met prior to the issuance of any certificates of compliance:
11. Iron pins must be in place at all lot corners and angle points.
12. A paper copy of the final as-built survey showing all structures, pins, roads, walks, driveways, drainage systems, and final floor elevations as well as spot grades shall be submitted and approved by the Town Planner.
13. A final as-built mylar shall be submitted and signed by the Commission.
14. All public health and safety components of the project must be satisfactorily completed prior to occupancy. In cases where all public health and safety components have been completed, the Zoning Official may issue a Certificate of Zoning Compliance provided a suitable bond is retained for any remaining site work.
General Conditions:
15. This site plan approval shall expire five years from date of approval. Failure to complete all required improvements within that time shall invalidate the approval. The developer may request an extension of time to complete the improvements from the Commission, in accordance the Connecticut General Statutes. The Commission shall require proper bonding be in place prior to the approval of any such extension.
16. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans that result in lesser impacts may be allowed subject to staff review and approval.
17. Any modifications to the proposed drainage or grading for the resubdivision is subject to the approval of the town engineer.
18. Additional erosion control measures are to be installed as directed by town staff if field conditions necessitate.
19. All improvements and development must be performed in accordance with the East Windsor Zoning Regulations and applicable Town policies.
20. By acceptance of this approval and conditions, the applicant, owner and/or their successors and assigns acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval.
Saunders moved/Rodrigue seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Kehoe/Rodrigue/Saunders
NEW BUSINESS: John Silva – Site Plan Approval to allow construction of a 2,080 square foot building (Dunkin Donuts) and parking lot located at 17 North Road, owned
by Nicholas P. Lata. [B-1 Zone; Map 2, Block 16, Lot 16C] (Deadline for decision 10/13/05):
Chairman Guiliano read the description of this Item of Business. Appearing to discuss the Application was Jay Ussery of J. R. Russo & Associates, and John Silva, the Applicant.
Mr. Ussery noted Town Planner Whitten had asked for a traffic study, which they received from H. A. Hesketh at 5:00 P. M. tonight. Mr. Ussery submitted copies to the Commissioner and Town Planner Whitten at the meeting. He indicated that the DOT may require a bypass lane.
Mr. Ussery noted the parcel is located at 17 North Road on the north side between the Connecticut Water Company and the trailer park behind Sophia’s Restaurant. The parcel contains .92 acres and is owned by the same individual who owns the trailer park. The parcel is served by sewer, water, gas, and electrical utilities. They are proposing a 2,000 square foot building. They received approval from the Wetlands Commission this month.
Mr. Ussery suggested the storm drainage system is the same system that exits at the rear of the property, there is a drainage swale going to the west side of the property which takes the water from Route 140 and the property across the road and flows into the Bollens Brook watershed and eventually into Blue Ditch. There will be a subsurface detention system at the rear of the building which will act as a water quality and sedimentation control structure.
Mr. Ussery noted Town Planner Whitten’s memo noted 1 parking space is required for every 50 square feet of building; this proposal requires 42 spaces. They are showing 38 parking spaces on the plan, including those for the drive-through queue and 2 handicapped spaces. In discussions with Dunkin Donuts Corporation they indicate that a lot of people go through the drive-through window, so they don’t feel they need as many parking spaces as are required by the regulations. Mr. Ussery indicated they are showing 9 queuing spaces from the drive up window on the west side at the back of the building to the site entrance on the east side of the parcel. He noted there is a section regarding queuing in the traffic study; they feel there is sufficient space as presented. They have looked at
alternative layouts – 2 curb cuts vs. 1 – 2 curb cuts frees up the front of the building and allows more landscaping and gives 14 queuing spaces instead of 9 which would bring us up to 40 parking spaces. Mr. Ussery feels DOT would rather see that layout; there is a one way access no matter how it’s done and it allows better delivery access. Chairman Guiliano suggested that layout is similar to the one on Route 5 which has a back entrance and has another access.
Chairman Guiliano queried Commissioner Ouellette as to what the State will say about 2 curb cuts? Commissioner Ouellette indicated he liked the 2 curb cuts but those cars
turning left coming out at the exit ware stuck there; there could be a line of cars waiting to turn in and they can’t turn in with one driveway. With another driveway, those cars waiting to make a left turn in may allow someone out; that won’t happen with 2 driveways. Commissioner Filipone questioned how it will affect traffic with the light? Mr. Ussery indicated that sometimes it’s been backed up to Chester’s to get up to the light at Shoham Road but it doesn’t seem to back up from Route 5. He feels the light at Shoham Road will create a break in the traffic to allow better access.
Commissioner Filipone questioned if this location will eliminate one of the current Dunkin Donut sites? Mr. Ussery replied this one will replace the one at Sophia’s.
Commissioner Filipone questioned what that would do to the traffic; he noted they do a lot of morning business at the Sophia’s location. Mr. Ussery suggested the traffic study indicated 70% of the cars on the A. M. peak will make a right hand turn in and a right hand turn out. Commissioner Ouellette suggested the study indicates most people turn right; what is the hardship of one driveway? Where is it justified for 2 driveways? Mr. Ussery suggested it provides better access for trucks delivering supplies. Commissioner Ouellette suggested it’s highly concentrated traffic. Mr. Ussery suggested the access driveway was DOT’s concern. Chairman Guiliano noted they could go to DOT on an informal basis without the Commission’s approval; personally he would
like to see 2 driveways but it might save the Applicant a trip to DOT if they had a preliminary discussion. Town Planner Whitten suggested this is recommending that you consider an exclusive left hand turn out. Mr. Ussery suggested that would be with a 2 driveway layout. He further noted that also assumes there will be a minor widening of Route 140.
Mr. Ussery referenced architectural styles with regard to building designs, one is a Colonial style like the location in East Granby, but the Dunkin Donut Corp isn’t in favor of that as they prefer the more traditional design. Chairman Guiliano and Town Planner Whitten indicated they prefer the Colonial design.
Chairman Guiliano referenced the lighting plan, noting it shows 20’ maximum pole heights with lights shining on the buildings. He questioned if it would bother the people living in the trailers? Mr. Ussery suggested there will be full cut offs on the lights. Chairman Guiliano questioned if they need the 20’ poles? Mr. Ussery suggested they could do 15’ or 12’ poles, but might need more poles. He indicated that based on the plan presented the light wouldn’t spill over onto the property of the trailer park. Chairman Guiliano noted he would prefer lower poles. Commissioner Rodrigue concurred, noting it would keep it consistent with other applications approved.
Chairman Guiliano reiterated he would like Mr. Ussery to talk to the State about the 2 curb cuts vs. 1. Mr. Ussery indicated he will do that; it will also give the Commission, Town Planner Whitten, and Town Engineer Norton time to review the traffic report.
Commissioner Filipone questioned if the parking spaces take into consideration SUVs, etc.? Mr. Ussery indicated reported the spaces are 21’ perpendicular to the curb; people
have 18’ to back out into the queue lane. Town Planner Whitten noted that when 26 to 50 parking spaces are required 2 must be handicapped spaces.
Mr. Ussery summarized the Commission’s recommendations as being: 1) Colonial New England architectural style, 2) talk to DOT regarding the curb cuts, noting the Commission prefers 2 driveways, and 3) lower pole height for the lighting.
Commissioner Ouellette suggested DOT’s charge is moving traffic along a State highway as safely as possible; they are not concerned with internal congestion. He cited problems with someone not being able to get out with the cars backed up to enter.
MOTION TO EXTEND THIS MEETING TO 10:45 P. M.
Filipone moved/Saunders seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Kehoe/Rodrigue/Saunders
MOTION TO CONTINUE the Application for Site Plan Approval for John Silva to allow construction of a 2,080 square foot building (Dunkin Donuts) and parking lot located at 17 North Road, owned by Nicholas P. Lata. [B-1 Zone; Map 2, Block 16, Lot 16C] until the Commission’s regularly scheduled meeting on 9/27/2005 at 7:30 P. M. in the Town Hall Meeting Room, 11 Rye Street, Broad Brook, CT.
Filipone moved/Saunders seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Kehoe/Rodrigue/Saunders
BUSINESS MEETING/(1) Correspondence:
Town Planner Whitten referenced letter from Chairman Guiliano to the DMV allowing Zoning Enforcement Officer/Wetlands Agent Rudek and Town Planner Whitten to sign approvals for motor vehicle dealer/repairers licenses for the Town of East Windsor; she requested the Commission make a motion as to their ability to comply with this recommendation.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE AUTHORIZATION FOR NANCY J. RUDEK, ZONING ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL, AND LAURIE P. WHITTEN, TOWN PLANNER, TO SIGN ON THE CHAIRMAN’S BEHALF ON THE STATE DMV CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL FORMS FOR DEALER AND REPAIRER LICENSES FOR THE TOWN OF EAST WINDSOR ONCE IT’S APPROVED BY THE EAST WINDSOR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
Filipone moved/Rodrigue seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Kehoe/Rodrigue/Saunders
BUSINESS MEETING /(2) Staff Reports:
Town Planner Whitten referenced inclusion of the Zoning Bulletin in the Commission’s packet.
APPROVAL OF MINTUES: Postponed.
SIGNING OF MYLARS/PLANS: None.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION TO ADJOURN this Meeting at 10:35 P. M.
Saunders moved/Filipone seconded/
VOTE: In Favor: Filipone/Guiliano/Kehoe/Rodrigue/Saunders
Respectfully submitted,
________________________________________________________
Peg Hoffman, Planning and Zoning Commission Recording Secretary
| 
