Meeting transcript
Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting
April 18, 2022 · Watch on YouTube · All meetings
Nelson and Leanne Hutchinson. Okay, it looks like Steve's trying to get in here. Hi, Steve. Hi, Jed.
Okay. Well, I have 07:02, so I will resume the public hearing from our last meeting. I'm just looking to see. I see iPhone popping up and that is normally Leanne. Leanne, are you with us? Yes.
Okay. Very good. So, the public hearing is resumed. Actually, a few more people with us tonight than I expected to see. I was not planning to have Matt go through the overall brief that he gave last month. He is certainly willing to enable to, you know, call up anything we need to address any particular questions, but my plan was to start with additional questions from the Commission. Well, I guess first I'll have our zoning agent comment on the application. Then the commission members can ask any questions that they might have. And following that, we'll give the public an opportunity to provide any comments or ask any questions that they might have. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to you, Jim, and you can tell us where we stand on the application.
All right. The application appears to be complete. The applicant has addressed outstanding questions, including signage, which I'd like the applicant to address, just go over the detail that was provided. It was brought to my attention that the applicant had offered to provide some screening fencing at the dumpster loading area. And I did not follow-up on that. So perhaps we could readdress that. And believe that's all I have as far as outstanding issues. Okay, Matt, would you like to address that?
Absolutely, Mr. Chairman. Do I have the ability to share my screen? I think it'll just be a tad bit easier.
You should be able to, Matt. Let me know if you can. Okay. Let me try. Yep. There we go.
Okay. Let me pull up my, plan here. So just again, for the record, my name is Matthew Bruton. I'm an engineer with BL companies headquartered at, 355 Research Parkway in Meriden. Alright. So the site plan is what you guys see in front of you here, and I'm just gonna zoom in to this back corner, and I'll highlight here. So this is the the dumpster, enclosure trash area, and you can see the call out here. I I highlighted in yellow. There's there's gates in this area. So, what we spoke about last time was providing some screening towards this. You can see in this call out, we're calling for a six a six foot high black vinyl coated chain link fence with privacy slats. So those dumpsters would be enclosed within this area and would have fencing along all three sides and and two gates in the front for access. So it would be screened, you know, from from public view. I think, Jim, that was what you were speaking about in terms of this area?
Yes. Okay. Is the original plan or was this added? I'm a little unclear. Yeah. This
was originally on the plan, Jim. This was not a change. Okay. All right. Thank you.
Yes. And then the other item that we provided to Jim, although we can't share any future tenants at this point, we did want to show potential signage that would be part of the project. So if you guys remember, I'll just zoom down. So this is Lake Road here, and this is Route 6 going left to right. We do show a proposed freestanding sign in this location. I'll show you that. And then, obviously, we'd have one building sign, as well. So, this would be this would be something that we're looking at for the building signage. So black lettering, gooseneck lighting, mounted to the building. Obviously, we're just asking for the size that's allowed by your zoning regulations, and then have the down lighting for for visibility. And then the freestanding sign would be, as I pointed out in the site plan, brick base, similar thing, gooseneck lighting to match the building lighting. You can see from the profile here on the side, with a future tenant shown here in black lettering as well. And that is what it would be on the corner of Lake Road and Route 6. So those are the two items
that we provided. And if Jim has any other questions, I'm happy to answer that of his or anybody in the Commission as well.
So how many feet in is that from the sidewalk, Matt? The pedestal for that sign?
Mr. Chairman, are you asking how far it is from the proposed sidewalk on Lake Road, the corner of Lake Road here? Yes. Give me one second and I will give you an answer. Just got to measure it myself. So it'd be approximately 17 feet off the new sidewalk location, in general from a corner of the road, about 30 feet off the edge of pavement. Okay, thank you, Matt. You're welcome.
Commission Chairman Larson. One other issue that was raised by the town engineer was the fact that the the location of the driveway is not 100 feet from the nearest driveway or intersection. I I I can't recall. And the town engineer had recommended that that be discussed and and the reason that it's not a shared driveway. If if that's the case be made part of the record. Our regulations do encourage shared drives. We like to see why that is not. Part of your plan.
Okay, yeah, I can I can Go ahead, Matt? Okay. Yep. So again, site plan here. So the goal the goal of the of the driveway on Lake Road is obviously secondary access because we're on a corner lot. You can see here, Jim was talking, I measured that. So the driveway on Lake Road is approximately just a hair under 140 feet from the intersection at Route 6. So we are providing the greatest separation distance we can from Route 6 to this driveway. And given the fact there's a traffic signal here, we wanted to allow the most queuing and visibility from here. We are next to the driveway for the plumbing facility building that is next door. So those are side by side, and the goal was to just provide maximum separation to the busier intersection, which would be Route 6 and Lake Revenor. And I'm happy to talk about the site line as well. I know that was an issue that was discussed
last time and brought up by the engineer, if you guys want me to show you that as well. But before we go there,
and so, Matt, when we look at the, it's 23.4 D traffic access, and I'm sure that you're very familiar with that, but it does talk about no proposed right well way shall be closer than 100 feet to any other existing or proposed right way. And jimmy: I'm not desirous of moving that driveway any closer to Route 6 I like the idea of keeping it further away. Jimmy: But it goes on to say, in the interest of public safety, the number of driveways on public streets shall be minimized. Jimmy: In a non residential zones access to adjacent sites shall be by common driveways wherever feasible. Jimmy: The Commission may require that any driveway be designated and easements to adjacent properties be conveyed in order to facilitate present or future sharing of such driveways. And I know at the last meeting you had mentioned that the applicants were not in favor of a shared driveway. And I was just trying to understand because it does seem with it, with the proximity to Route 6, it would be advantageous from the town's point of view to have a common driveway going in your right at the property line, if not using the existing one into Franklin plumbing right now and have it branch off to both of those things. That to me would be the best way to go. I know the applicants weren't interested in that. And I was trying to understand why they were opposed to it.
It seems like Yes, so straightforward way to approach it.
Absolutely, Mr. Chairman. I'm happy to speak to that. It's a good question. So in general, obviously, we think especially for a corner lot to access points to the site would be most effective to getting people to this facility as opposed to going through the light and just entering from the route fixed driveway. The problem with shared common driveways is, there's everybody wants usually restrictions and maintenance agreements that come along with them, And it's hard to get multiple parties and future parties to agree to maintenance terms or restrictions or hours on a driveway when it's shared by one or more businesses. So to make it clean and easy, we always try to propose individual driveways that safe for both businesses and not have to get into any legal messy agreement between the two, especially when parties change over the years.
Okay, so, you know, and for the commission, I guess, when we get to the point where we're deliberating about the application, that's certainly something that we can discuss at that point. Because it does seem to me like our regulations allow us to say that you have to have a common driveway. I would hate to have the fallback be, well then we'll put the driveway 100 foot away and make it right at the corner of Route 6. That's not at all what I'm looking for. I'm looking for, you know the win, win answer for your best for the applicants best for the towns but that's something we can discuss a little bit later tonight. Did you have anything else agent house.
The sight line issue was raised and I believe it's been adequately addressed, but perhaps Mac could touch upon that. I did receive a letter from the owners, the I'm sorry, neighbors attorney, from the owner of Benjamin Franklin. His attorney said that access could be provided for clearing trees to provide that site line if necessary. It's very probable that the site line improvements could be done within the towns right away. I could not make that determination, but nonetheless, provisions were made to access it should the applicant need to get on their property. So that's part of the record submitted today by Attorney Penny out of Manchester.
Okay. Very good. Matt, anything you wanted to add on that? I think we got everything we were looking for on that particular issue.
Yep, nope, fine by me how Jim explained it. Okay, very good.
Moving on to the Commission members at this point. Vice Chairman Kremay, do you have any comments or questions on the application at this point?
Not that I can think of. Seems to be okay. You don't have any comments either, Jed. Steve? No questions or comments. Leanne? Yes, I have several questions. Okay, go ahead.
Most of them are about the driveway. I'm glad it's already been brought up about their driveway because I don't think it was discussed too much last month. And I think that's probably the best idea. I have a concern that there is proposed another driveway or curb cut onto Route 6. It seems to me right now that it would be more advisable to just have people be controlled by the light at Lake Road and Route 6 and just have, whether it turns out to be a shared driveway or not, have people enter this proposed retail building off Lake Road instead of having two curb cuts, one on Route 6. I think with the signage and visibility there, it's a big square lot, that people traffic is going to be able to identify the building well enough so that the building the business isn't going to suffer from people not being able to see it from Route 6 and then make a cut. So, I'm not sure that two driveways are needed, and I'd like to discuss that a little more. And also, it was said last month about if there's excess water at the site going under a culvert under Route 6 to the other side of the road where we already have excavation, Can someone tell me how much water that's anticipated to be or projected to be?
Okay, so the first issue, and I'll let Matt address it first here, the desire for the extra curb cut on Route 6.
Mr. Chairman, I'm just going to share my screen again. Ms. Hutchinson, we do show two driveways, one on Route 6 and one on the side road on Lake Road. One on Route 6 is the most desirable entrance because that is the main thoroughfare adjacent to the site. And the goal of that driveway is to allow for truck access and employee access and customer access from Route 6. That is a DOT because it's a DOT road, requires a DOT encroachment permit that has been submitted and is being reviewed by them. What they say will go here. So with that said, the goal of having two driveways is just to allow options. But overall, we don't want to put any truck traffic on Lake Road. That is not the intention of having two driveways here, and I believe we kind of heard loud and clear from some of the residents, adjacent or even a little bit further away from this corner that they do not want further traffic on Lake Road as they had some concerns. If any driveway needs to say it is the Route 6 driveway, that is critical to the operation of the store. And it's honestly the the best location for it because it's on the main busy the busier road of the two. So DOT will will get us comments on that and whatever they say in terms of orientation or striping or signage,
we will have to follow. What we have submitted on our plan that you can see here is our best look forward on that, and we're positive that we will get an approval from them. I don't know if that completely answers your question or you want me to move on to the stormwater portion of your question?
I'm not understanding how that would really amount to traffic on Lake Road because you're so close to the intersection of Route 6 that they wouldn't really be driving up and down Lake Road, a tractor trailer truck. But correct me if somebody's turning in?
Right. If we close off this entrance, then all all the traffic needs to come up into Lake Road. And then when it leaves, it would have to go back to Route 6, or they have the option to turn right and go, you know, further down Lake Road. So, giving the option of allowing the driveway on Route 6 allows cars to be able cars and trucks to enter the site and leave the site without even having to touch Lake Road. So it pushes more traffic to Route 6, which is, I think, most desirable for the residents that that live on on Lake Road, and, the truck access cannot actually work on Lake Road. This road is too skinny. It doesn't really work, so the trucks need to enter from Route 6.
And I think you said last month or someone said that there'd be not more than one tractor trailer truck a week. Is that the case? Yeah.
Yeah. It'd be typically for a store of this size, it should be one tractor trailer a week.
Okay. I guess you've answered my question. I still don't completely agree that this would that a tractor trailer truck couldn't turn in from Lake Road you know, given I mean, it could just swing into a driveway, wherever it ends up being shared or not. And also, I don't see it increasing traffic on Lake Road because if people would normally go home on Lake Road, then they're going to do that anyway, whether they're shopping or not. And if they would not normally go up Lake Road, they're just going to go up to the light if that were the only driveway or out on Route 6 and then be trying to pull in and out without it being at the traffic light. And again, one, they wouldn't have a traffic light and two, they wouldn't be attempting to drive on Lake Road anyway.
Yes. So there are definitely people that are traveling on Lake Road regardless of whether there's a new development here or not. But you would expect some additional traffic based on new business coming into town. So attracting people to the business and only being able to use Lake Road would definitely, I think, cause a little bit more traffic on this section of the road. So keeping them on Route 6 is the most desirable for this
Okay. Well, that's I guess I'm not thoroughly convinced then because I think again, I don't think visibility to the business is going to be a problem. I think it would be better for traffic concerns because, again, people aren't really going to be driving up and down Lake Road. Your business is going to be right there. It's going to be visible. There's not going be anything in front of it. So, people are just going to if they're coming from the light, would just turn into a driveway on Lake Road and then you'd be right there. So, again, I don't think there's going to be any increased traffic on Lake Road, and if there is a driveway granted on Route 6 as well, then they're not going to be controlled by the light. They're going to take longer trying to get in and out directly across from an existing business. And I think that the safety should come first. You know, again, I think I'm picturing a tractor trailer truck being able to come and go from a Lake Road driveway only.
Yeah. I'm I'm telling you right now, and I can show you the truck turn plans that are further down this set. A tractor trailer goes like this and then reverses into the loading area here. Mhmm. A tractor trailer cannot go up Lake Road, wind around the building. There's nowhere for it to turn around on the property. So a truck cannot enter from Lake Road. It just it's not possible. So this entrance needs to stay here, to allow truck access. And that's what DOT is reviewing right now in terms of safety and drainage.
I see the line you just drew, but how are they going to be able to turn around more easily if they just come in from Route 6?
If they come in from Route 6 and they're traveling in this direction, they pull in front of the store here and then reverse. If they come from this direction, they do the same thing, pull in front of the store and reverse. And then when they leave, they have the option to go left or right. Left onto Lake Road or right on through?
No. Left onto left onto Route 6 or right onto Route 6. No trucks going to Lake Road.
So why would they not have the ability to back up as you just showed if they came in off Lake Road?
I'll just change colors here. So a tractor trailer coming in this direction, make the turn up here, cannot make this turn right here too tight, and then they can come here, but they need to back they need to back into this place here. There's not enough room for them to pull forward and then back up, or they'd have to pull into the road and then back up, and DOT will not allow that. So the orientation of the site has been set up to allow access from Route 6. There's no possible way for them with that large of a vehicle to maneuver through the parking lot from Lake Road.
Okay. So the driveway, as it's shown here, since we're not completely done with this discussion of a shared driveway or not or a new driveway cut, you're saying it doesn't have room to swing in off Lake Road and then back up anywhere except on Route 6, which isn't allowed?
Correct. This driveway here on Lake Road would only be for passenger vehicles. All the trucks would come from Route 6 come and go from Route 6.
Okay. So you're saying there would be no egress onto the Lake Road driveway?
Truck. For trucks. No. The the Lake Lake Road would only be for for cars. Route 6 could be for cars and for trucks.
Okay. I'm hoping that that's something that could be worked out. Again, I think that safety has to come first, and I think it would be good because Route 6 is a straightaway. And I had mentioned briefly last month about the possibility, which we probably wouldn't be able to determine tonight, but whether or not our 40 mile an hour speed limit to the center of town that ends right around Bunker Hill Road, just a little bit to the west, could be extended down through this proposed area. Okay, I guess you've answered my question. If you could just go on and answer the one about any given amount of water going under Route 6 onto the actual Before we shift gears here, Matt, one
of the things that I saw twice actually within the last couple of weeks and I was very surprised at is on a couple of times on Route 6 going into, I think it's maybe it's 66, Package, as you get closer to Willamantic, there was a semi truck blocking the road, trying to back into the store. And it took, you know, two or three minutes where they had traffic back up where they were trying to do that. So I certainly appreciate, I didn't think they'd be allowed to do it. Maybe they're not supposed to do it, it wasn't during rush hour, but they were doing it And I thought it was pretty inconvenient.
Yeah. Mister chairman, that that's a great point. Yeah. It's it's sometimes it's practical to do it if it's not a busy time of the day or the or the month, but it's not allowed. So the goal of our orientation is to have all truck movements internal to the property. And to miss Hutchinson, to your point, DOT is reviewing this. This this driveway on Route 6 is completely within their control. They will only grant us an approval to build it if it if they deem it safe. If they have any suggestions on making it safer, whether that's striping or location or making it, you know, right in, right out or something of that nature, we will have to do that. It is it's not up to us.
It it would be under their control, under their review. So if it's approved, you can be sure that, they have deemed it safe. Okay. Well, that's helpful.
Man. I'm would you like me to talk about the stormwater? Yeah. Yep. Yes, please. Yep.
So, you guys remember from last time that overall, the topography of this site in general just kind of goes in this direction. And currently, on the property, there's kind of a depression in this area, and then the water leaves by getting captured by a pipe that goes under Route 6 and discharges to the other side of the highway. That is a 18 inch RCP pipe, which stands for reinforced concrete pipe. So that is the current drainage pattern of this property, as part of the 2004 Connecticut stormwater manual, which is a guideline that we follow, when designing drainage systems. There's a couple of different things that we try to do, but one of those is to maintain drainage patterns. It's particularly important for a bunch of reasons, but one is, obviously, if it's water is going someplace that is expected to go, we wanna continue to go that way. So we're not flooding out neighbors or streets,
putting too much water to a wetland or drying out a wetland, things of that nature. So, the goal of our system is to is to, match drainage patterns, and that's what we're gonna do. So, let me see if I can pull up the other plans. Guys, hold on one second. I could pull up the same. But in general, the goal is to keep water going to where it's coming from, and that is the strange pipe. So we are proposing system on our property to deal with the increase in impervious area. So we have catch basins, deep dumps, hoods, head of them separators, underground storage system, and all of that captures and treats, and we'll recharge whatever we can onto the property. But the overflow will connect and discharge through this 18 inch RCP pipe that discharges across the street. This is a pipe that is owned and maintained by the DOT. And as part of this encroachment permit that they're reviewing, it includes the driveway, but it also includes drainage. So they are reviewing the drainage connection as well. So if they have any comments on it, we'll obviously revise accordingly. But basically, what we're doing is capturing and treating the water and then discharging it to where it leaves now, which is through this pipe to the across the road. I don't know if that answers your question, miss Hutchinson.
Yes. Thank you. I I can't quite tell from here. Do you know whereabouts on the property across the street it does come out?
If you give me two seconds, I'll pull up, Google, and I will try to show you on an area. If you can see here on this plan, there's a little there's a little driveway. I'll just trace it here real quickly so you can see it. It's kind of the edge of a driveway, and then this is, a larger driveway, which I believe is the gas station. So that's the gas station driveway here. This is the little one. So the the outlet for the pipe is roughly where my mouse is in this kind of grassy area right here. You can see on the left hand side where my mouse is, that is where it's picked up. So it it roughly is crossing between this car and the Route 6 label.
Okay. Thanks. And just one other question. Do you have any projection for how much water that would entail?
I don't know off the top of my head, but if you give me a few minutes, I can find it out. We do evaluate the storm water system for a variety of storms, the two year, ten, twenty five, and a hundred. So it would depend on the size of the storm, but I can tell you that the water leaving this pipe now would be decreased after we build this property.
It would be decreased even though you're saying that it would still so it's there now, and you're saying it would be decreased because of the measures are part of your proposal on this retail Correct. And the pavement? Correct. You're saying it would actually be decreased? Yes. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome.
Matt, while you're talking stormwater runoff, I think you probably had a chance to see Brandon Hanfield response to your letter and he asked if we should consider putting the. Run off from the roof drains into that big collection facility.
Yes, mister chairman. We and we'd responded to mister Hanfield that we are we are have no problem making that that that connection. So that would push the storm water from the roof of the building into the underground system, would help recharge groundwater. So, yeah, we are happy to take that suggestion and have it part of the project. Okay. Thanks, Matt. Anything else, Leigh Ann? No.
Anne Blanchard, do you have any comments or questions? Okay, don't hear anything from Ian. Kevin, how about you?
I have no questions or comments at this time. Okay, very good.
And Matt, I didn't see a new site plan drawing, but you had talked about maintaining that eight foot buffer between the edge of the road and sidewalk as part of the finished plan?
Yes, Mr. Chairman. Along with that, the extension of the sidewalk to the corner of Route 6 and the connection across the street to your eventual recreation area as well. Happy to make those changes as part of the project. Okay. Yep. Thank you.
At this point, Anne Blanchard, did you make it back yet? Okay, heard nothing. Abby, can I get you to help me going around the room here to allow members of the public an opportunity to comment or ask questions?
Sure thing, yep. We'll start first with Andy. And Andy, if you could tell me your last name, that'd be great. All right. You can come back whenever you're ready, Andy. So next we'll look at Catherine, Catherine Magaldi Lewis. Catherine, you're muted.
Is that good? Yep, that's better. Thank you. I kept clicking, but it wouldn't unmute. Thank you, everybody. That's that was good presentation. My only question really is, is this a a done deal? And why why we're not waiting in conjunction with the Yukon projects to see if there's something else that we might want to be able to prove there rather than this store?
Well, it is not a done deal. Okay. As long as the applicant, it is a, you know, and I forget the term, it is an as of right building forum. So as long as they comply with our regulations, we have to approve it.
So even though the long term planning said that we wanted to make sure we kept it within the rural atmosphere or whatever of Andover and we got all of the suggestions from town from residents that said they wanted a small business there or a bakery there or a restaurant there or anything that that does not not matter. I am not saying it like it is nasty. Am trying not to be nasty. That it does not matter. But I am saying does that not have any weight? It
does not have any weight on this particular decision. Now, I agree with all your thoughts on, you know, I think Diane Grenier last meeting talked about a lot of different stores that we would like to see in Andover. And if we have a group that is going out and trying to work with business owners to get them to come into Andover, that is all great. But in this particular case, and I did not even know that this piece of property was on the market under consideration, but it is. And somebody is interested in developing it. And if it meets our regulations, then we have to approve it. And that is why it behooves us when we talk about, as you continually remind us how important it is to work together, economic development commission and planning zoning commission and that sort of thing, we should be out trying to make arrangements to see what we can do to get one of these other businesses that we want to come into Andover. But here's somebody that's found a piece of property, that they're going to comply with our regulations and build what we've got is an as of right matter with regard to our regulations, we put that in there, we have to approve it. And if we don't approve it
and allow time to keep marching on, it gets approved automatically. Oh, okay. So I think on the town's behalf, are trying to make what I think the applicant has come up with is a very nice and attractive looking building and that sort of thing. One of the things I meant to say at the last meeting, I heard a couple of people say that we didn't want the big box stores in Andover. And I'm not exactly sure how big a big box store is, but what we put in our regulations to try to minimize that was we put a maximum size for a store of 15,000 square feet. And this store here is a little over 10,000 square feet. So, you know, I think it's well under what we would consider a big box kind of store. So, I
only have one other question, please. If something happens where this doesn't, it doesn't work that people aren't coming and they have to, they decide to pull out or whatever. What happens with the building?
I guess, you know, it would be offered for sale or something at that point.
Okay. So, it would be up to Andover to sell that building?
No. It would be up to whoever owns it at the time.
Okay. And do they come back to us then? Do we do this again to see if it's a business that we would allow in town or want in town? Well,
and again, if you look in our section on the business zone, or in this case this is zoned industrial, but it says anything in the business zone is permissible here as of right in the business zone. As long as it's in that list of things, it would get approved. You know, if it was something totally different and it wasn't in that approved, you know, that list of as of right things, then you know, then we'd have to come back before the Planning and Zoning Commission, and it might be a special permit. If it was something that was going to need a special permit today, it'll need a special permit most likely in the future and we would have it. We put, you know, retail store is a matter of right operation and we tried to limit it to less than 15,000 square feet to avoid the big box stores and we got, somebody to come in and want to build a business enterprise in our town and that doesn't happen very often. So there are some real positives with respect to that that can help us out.
Okay. Well, thank you very much, Jed. I'm all set. Okay. So next we have Kathy Palazzi.
Thank you, Abby. I just want to say to Matt, that was an excellent presentation. I like the idea of being able to see the site, and I specifically like the idea of the two driveways, not one driveway. So I hope you will continue with two. Thank you.
Well, Kathy, you did you mean two driveways between two driveways off of Lake Road or two driveways late? No,
what he presented, Jed. He presented one coming off Route 6 and one coming off of Lake Road. Okay. Thank you, Kathy. You're welcome.
So next we have someone named CD. If you could tell me your full name, that would be great, CD.
Hi, I'm Kurt Dowling from 389 Lake Road, Andover. My only question is, and just talking with Kathy had mentioned about the, the entrance and egress, to the facility. I, I missed the presentation earlier. I come on late. Does it, does like the Route 6 driveway, does that come in and go out? You know, the same entrance and exit onto 6 and also, is it the same on Lake Road is my question?
It does allow entrance from both directions off of Route 6 and Lake Road and exit onto Lake Road or Route 6. My thinking is that if you were trying to come out and make a left, cross Route 6 during rush hour, the car would probably choose to go out Lake Road and turn at the light. If traffic is very light, somebody might go out and make a left on the Route 6, exit there as well. But they they both have, you know, ins and outs on both both of them. As Matt discussed, you know, the Lake Road one is probably not designed big enough to allow the trucks to come in and make that turn.
The trucks would be only on Route 6. Was there a traffic study done with the DOT and like the state police?
There was a traffic study done that BL had done. I think I saw the engineer in the crowd that did that traffic study, and I think we discussing how the trucks would probably come in on off peak hours. But Matt, I'll turn it over to you to add anything that you want on that particular matter.
Yes, I think it was Kurt. Yeah, we did do a traffic impact study, that was submitted to the town. It's also being peer reviewed by the DOT because it's a encroachment permit for the DOT to access Route 6. So they are currently reviewing now as well. And in general, our traffic study showed that there was no detrimental impact, with this new development on any of the, the roadways that surround this area. But if you have a specific question, Pat Pablo, our traffic engineer, is is here if you want more detail than what I gave you.
Life lifelong member of the fire department and also fire chief. Right now, that is probably our best spot for auto crashes, since they put the light in the Lake Road entrance and exit and also having, the, you know, the gas station, across the street. We're down there for minor, minor crashes. They're down there for serious crashes, including fatalities and that whole stretch. If anybody sat there, you know, and I mean, you can go to our resident trooper and ask him. He's, he sits there all the time and, they're doing it anywhere from the speed limit or less than a speed limit to, way over the speed limit down through there, that stretch. They pass where the yellow lines have it cleared off in the middle just to get through and everything else. I I just I I think that's going to create a the root sticks part I'm barely talking about. I, you know, the light can be regulated and, you know, that's that's what it is, but to put it put the emphasis on a person, that that pulled into the Dollar General to do some shopping and on the way out, they're heading towards Manchester or Bolton and, leave it up to them to decide if they want to cross Route 6. I know it's it's it looks pretty wide open there, but,
these vehicles are, it's, you know, I I use the road all the time, because you I live on the East Side of the lake. So I use I use that in more than anything and there's so many, like I said, crashes with trucks and vehicles. I think we're just gonna be adding to that, you know, that that thing. I would much rather see the only entrance in egress for that place. So may maybe an entrance, you know, say coming eastbound, but but not a not not a, not an egress going going westbound. That's, that's suicide. That's, my only comments right now. I I, I feel that every every open piece of space on Route 6 through this entire town, should have some type of commercial development development on it, just to ease the tax burden in this town. And I'll, I'll leave it with that. Thank you.
Okay. On that topic, Curt, and I knew new traffic was an important issue for everybody. And I think it's the state that makes the determination on that. But I was surprised when we heard Pat's very good presentation last month that the number of accidents in that area were relatively low compared to what I was expecting the number to be. And you had a chart that showed all times a day, everything was green with respect to the study. And I went out on two different occasions to just watch the traffic on, Well, the first one was like quarter to four in the afternoon till quarter after. And, you know, my numbers came out a little bit higher than what Pat had briefed us on. And so I said, well, I'm gonna go back at 05:00 where the traffic is the heaviest. And I upped my game a little bit. I used the stopwatch and I used the counter because I figured I was probably not very accurate. My numbers came out right on with what briefed us that they were. And so part of my conclusion was we're maybe a little spoiled in Andover with what traffic looks like because I didn't see any backups. So I saw one thing where the
light turned green allowing the people to transit on Route 6 towards Manchester and somebody wanted to get into the gas station there and there was a little backup for a minute. I do know when I'm out trying to make a left across Route 6, it gets difficult at times. Have to make a right, turn around and come back down. But the data of the number of cars, I think the study was certainly correct. I didn't really doubt it. I just wanted to be able, after everybody, myself included, thought the traffic was worse than all green, go out and validate that. I didn't see any big hard spots out there when I was there. Pat, can you address the issue of where did you get the crash numbers? Because I was trying to figure out, I know there's a lot of accidents on Route 6 and there must be a cutoff point. How do you or the state, maybe where you got the information, how close to the Route 6 traffic light there do you have to be before it counted in the numbers that you were looking at? Not hearing you yet, Pat. You went off. Can hear me now? Yep, now again. Go ahead. Perfect. Can I share my screen? Should be you should be able to. Yes, Pat. Can you see my screen? Yes. Yep. Yep. Excellent.
So Connecticut DOT has, in cooperation with Yukon, has a Connecticut crash data repository where you can query data from 2000 I'm sorry, 1995 all the way to 2021, the end of the year. The data gets updated monthly, but usually the the last quarter, like, 2022, it wouldn't be it it may not have all the recorded data. So that said, for this study, we looked at the information between January 2019 to December 2022. And I see this is not correct. Let me pull back. But basically, you can query data whichever way you can. This is information along Route 6 as well as Lake Avenue. As you can see, for those three years, it points to two crashes. Well, if I had the correct date, it has three crashes total on the segment of US Route 6 to the North of Lake Road, three crashes to the South, and three crashes at Lake Road. And you can, again, set up query whichever way you would like for particular road segment intersection and determine the type of crash,
the type of severity and any other information you may find warranted. Okay, thanks, Pat. Sure. Okay, who's next, Abby? So next we have Diane Greiner. Diane, you're I'm all set. Thank you very much.
Okay. Next we have Douglas Grunert. Abby Doug's our architect. Yeah, I'm the applicant's advocate for the record. Sorry about that. Okay, next we have Elaine Picard.
There we go. Hi, I just wanted to say I'm, I'm very happy as Jed mentioned it's rare that all of a sudden, a small retail store says hey we want to go ahead and set up shop in Andover, and along Route 6, it's perfect for it. The traffic is what over 20,000 people driving by every day. Anything to help with the convenience of for Andover residents to because I've heard several residents say it'll be great to be able to stop and buy some party supplies paper plates or, you know, something for an art project for their kids or something last minute that people always seem to do and it'll keep us from going to Willamantic or Manchester to go ahead and get our stuff done. I mean there are dollar generals, you know on Route 44 and Coventry there's one in Mansfield it's like all the towns around us have one. And they are all benefiting from the tax benefits of having this small retail business in town. I'm really glad that Andover is now going to get that opportunity. And if this business ends out being successful, it will look good for that strip of Route 6 to maybe attract a small professional building or a small restaurant, you know some that all of a sudden they'll say hey you know there's stuff going on in Andover, maybe, you know, we'll, we'll look into, you know, hopping on to the Route 6 bandwagon, you know, certainly we don't want, you know, Walmart's or, you know, anything big in town because that's just too big for us we'll leave that to Manchester and
Wyndham, but I just want to say I'm, I'm excited about it. Know a lot of people are like oh no no we want it, it's like no, this is the first time that anybody's really shown a lot of business in and it's not like we don't go out searching for a bank for a doctor's office we have in the past, talk to each and we have talked to Farmington bank when it existed, you know, way back when the smaller banks when they existed. We even lost her ATM in town because the owner of Andover Plaza was charging too much for them to have their ATM there. So, I mean this, this is an ongoing thing that we're always looking in the background and talking to people here and there. It was just kind of out of the blue that this one that you know hit without even us knowing about it, but I'm, I'm happy about it. So just want to put in my 2¢. Thanks, Elaine. Yep. Okay, next we have Erin Boris.
Hi there, Erin Boris, Dogwood Drive. I just still have the concern about the utilization of a driveway in and out on Route 6. I know that folks just mentioned the information about the traffic study having started in 2019. Just to be mindful of the fact that during the pandemic time or the height of that piece, lots of folks were not driving and utilizing that road into Rhode Island and such daily. And so not to say that the data was completely, you know, influenced by that, but I think that's a large piece. And as someone who lives close to that area, having an in and out turn seems incredibly dangerous for someone to come out on the Route 6 piece and try to take a left really at any of time of day. Folks drive way in excess of the speed limit in that area. So I'm super concerned about that still. And if we're looking at putting a business there that's utilizing a tractor trailer once a week, do we look at, and I don't know if it's even possible at this point to look at businesses that would not be using tractor trailers for products, some type of other business. Again, I'm very much for increasing the tax base, but I don't know how excited I am about the compromise being safety for the folks that live close by. That's still my concern. Thanks. Thanks, Erin. So next we have Joanne Hebert.
Hi, can you hear me? I can't Okay,
great. Elaine kind of stole my thunder. I wanna echo everything that she said. I mean we've waited forever to get someone to be interested in Andover you know let alone you know be particular and you know have such an accommodating presentation. Someone coming back month after month and presenting. So I myself am just very excited that we could find something that will look nice on that corner. Every store that's been built that I've seen, and I just went in one in Bolton last week and was pleasantly surprised with the things that you can pick up there as a young mom years ago with three kids and then knowing you needed something like Elaine said for a school project or something you had to bring in for someone's birthday or something, it would have been great to just go down to the corner rather than having to travel to one of the opposite towns. Why not us? I am fiscally responsible. I am gonna wanna generate that commercial tax base. Keep talking about it. Here we go. We have something. We have to be excited about this and just, you know, make sure it's built safely and looks nice. I think it'll utilize a great spot. And yeah, I'm very pleased. I just wanted to lend my support to it. Thank you everyone. Thanks, Joanne. The next we have Catherine Hutchinson. She's still here. I have no questions thank you.
Okay. Thank you Catherine. I think Andy was the only person that we didn't get an acknowledgment from. Are you still there, Andy? Are with us? Yeah, hi, I've got no questions. Thank you.
For the record Andy, could you mention your last name, please? Vinay Coochie. Thank you.
And at that point, have we been through everybody from the public, Abi? I guess is there anybody that we missed? Anybody have a follow-up question before we wrap up the comment time here? Okay. With that being done, I'll make a motion that we adjourn the public hearing. Second that. Thank you, Scott. And I'm going to go roll call because there's just too many little boxes here and I can't I won't be able to get all the hands being raised, but Ann Cremay? Aye. Scott Persson? Aye. Steve Nelson. Aye. Leigh Ann Hutchinson. Aye.
I vote aye as well. Motion carries five-zero-zero. The public hearing is adjourned.
Is adjourned or excuse me, Mr. Chairman adjourned or closed? Closed.
Yeah, thank you. Did you want to take that vote again to make sure it's closed? This is Robin Pearson, counsel for the applicant. I understand and
I will do that. The Thank next motion is I'll make a motion to close the hearing. I'll second that, Jeff. Thank you, Scott.
And Anne Cremay? Aye. Scott? Aye. Steve? Aye. Leigh Ann? Aye.
And I vote aye as well? That motion passes five-zero-zero, and the public hearing is closed. Okay. It is 08:03. And I'll call the regular meeting to order. Roll call seating of alternates. I see all five commission members present and participated in the public hearing. So I will not be seating the alternates, Ian Blanchard or Kevin Artisan. Susan England is absent tonight. Additions or changes to the agenda? Under
old business, I think our item 6A new business is really old business and I'll include like to put that as the first item under the old business is the application at 580 Lake Road. The. What's currently listed is 5B. The discussion of requests for economic development Commission regarding entryway signage for the town of Andover is actually new business, but I would like to discuss it in the order that it is listed here anyhow so that we let everybody who is attending have their say and get on with other things before we discuss other regulation changes and that sort of thing. So, are my two changes to the agenda. Does any other Commission Member have any other change or addition they would like to propose? Hearing none, I make a motion that we approve the changes to the agenda as we discussed, making old business A, the 580 Lake Road application, and including new business is new item C, and renumbering the other ones, re lettering the other ones is appropriate there. Second.
Thank you, Steve. Roll call vote to Anne Cremay. Aye. Scott? Aye. Steve? Aye. Lee Ann? Aye.
And I vote aye as well the motion to change the agenda passes 500. With that in mind, item up is the revised site plan from Garrett whole. Jimmy: Property 580 Lake Road applicants seeking a site plan approval for permitted use retail and an industrial zone. Before acting on a motion there, And I know we have I'd like to discuss the. Access driveway off of. Link Road with the Commission. Jimmy: In it again, you know the. We've heard the applicants you talk about it's maybe cleaner to have. Jimmy: Two different entrances there close together. Jimmy: I'm not sure that our. Regulations permit that says no proposed driveway shall be closer than 100 feet to any other existing or proposed driveway unless the site is of such width that compliance with this requirement
would preclude access. And I don't think we are in a case where it would preclude access. We have the driveway off of Route 6 to provide access, although I am not interested in having the driveway moved any closer to Route 6. So, the issue for the Commission is the Commission may require that any driveway be designed and easements to adjacent properties be conveyed in order to facilitate present or future sharing of such driveways. Any discussion on any commission members on what our thoughts might be on that particular issue?
I think, Jed, in my opinion, what they proposed is the most logical access for the site. The question is, do they need to apply for a variance or can we approve it as is based on our regulations?
I don't think we can approve it as it is based on our regulations, and they would have to go and get a variance at that point. Don't see where we have the latitude in there. Agent Halsey, do you what's your take on that particular regulation?
I personally thought that the regulation gives the Commission the latitude. I don't have it in front of me, but
Debbie, allow me to share my screen and I will see if I can pull That that is twenty three four gs, correct? You should be able to, Jen.
Okay, so I cut and pasted my little notes for the meeting tonight and the highlighted portions are what I thought is where I was coming up with a hardship on that. Says, and no proposed driveway shall be closer than 100 feet to any other existing or proposed driveway.
I'm focusing on the latter part unless the site is of such width that clients with this requirement would preclude access. I mean, in my read of that, it gives the commission some discretion.
Yeah. It seems like this would be the best choice because otherwise it doesn't work well to have a joint driveway. If you move it too close to the highway, to the light, the corner, that's not good. And you need more than one entrance because if they have just the one on Route 6, that means everybody's trying to make a left turn out of there instead of going onto Lake Road and then to the light and having the light to be able to make a left turn. Safety wise, it seems like the best choice to have the two driveways.
Yeah, in my experience, shared drives, whether it be residential or commercial, they're a great idea and they they they can they can offer some benefit. But they tend to create a lot of problems as well. And they do for a host of reasons, insurance, just future tenants. There are definitely some drawbacks to them from the developer side or from current or future owner side. That's to say they don't have positives as well. That's why it's in their regs. Okay.
Any other Commission members have thoughts on that particular issue? Hi, this is Leanne. Yep, go ahead Leanne.
Hi, I'm a little, I guess a little unclear about a couple of things to do with the shared driveway. One is what Jim just said about concerns he's had and I know he has a lot of experience with this shared driveway kind of thing, but if we apply that to this as a reason not to urge them to pursue a shared driveway, then to me we would be doing that. We would be making that as a reason for anybody applying anywhere in town. I mean, if there's always going to be insurance issues with insurance and maintenance and what have you. So, know, we crafted our regulations the way we did, and I'm just wondering if this would be an excuse for everybody.
So was your thought dearly in that we we could allow the driveway to exist as it's proposed on this application or you're saying that we should not.
Well, I'm mostly talking right now about the shared driveway or not. Like I said, I know Jim has a lot of experience with it. I'm just wondering if we say that that's a reason not to ask them to just have a shared driveway and not have their own driveway cut that anybody else who comes forward with an application we're just always going to say we're always going to not ask them to have a shared driveway. Okay.
I think you're leaning towards in the interest of public safety, the number of driveways on a public street shall be minimized. Yes.
Okay. Any other Commission members have a thought on this one way or the other?
I just think, Jed, when you read this, I don't think it gives us the latitude based on the regulations to approve it without a variance.
I seem to think about that. I agree with what you are saying. What I would hope the outcome would not be is that the applicant could say, okay, I will comply with your regulations and I will move it 100 feet away from the Franklin plumbing one and put it right there at the corner, which is not where we want it.
Yeah, I agree. What they've proposed is the obvious solution. The question is how do we approve it?
Okay. So I think, you know, I what I'm hearing and what I kind of what my take is that it is in the interest of public safety to minimize the number of driveways. We heard a comment at the last meeting that we have the stop sign for Merritt Valley Road. We've got the crosswalk for the rail trail. We've got the driveway to Franklin plumbing. We've got another crosswalk to get to the parking lot. And we've got the retail store entrance all within about 100 feet there. That kind of gets confusing. So, certainly, I think I will that make a we ask the applicant in the interest of public safety to investigate the use of a common driveway and show us why it would not be feasible if they conclude that it's not. Second.
Any other discussion on that particular motion? Hearing none, I'll call for a vote. Anne?
I guess I. I don't really I'd almost like to abstain because I really don't have a good viewpoint either way. I think it should be maybe a variance instead of this. So I don't know. Can I abstain instead of saying either way? You can't abstain? I think I will. Okay. So Ian abstains. Scott? No. You're saying that you
don't think it's a public safety issue? I think it is a public safety issue, but I don't believe that them having to go to get a variance is the answer either.
That's not the motion. The motion is to go investigate why it's not feasible to have a common dry claim. Require the applicant to come back to us and tell us why it's not feasible because it says sites shall be by common driveway wherever feasible. I think it's feasible. It may not be convenient, but I think it's feasible, but we owe the applicant an opportunity to tell us why he thinks it is not.
All I'm saying Jed is I think that maybe there's a better way.
I have tried to come up with a better way, and I can come up with worse ways, but I haven't come up with a better one without the common driveway approach. That is what to me looks like the best in the interest of public safety. Okay, then I'll vote yes if that's the only. Aye. Okay. Steve? Aye. Leanne? Aye.
I vote aye as well. The motion passes four zero one with Anne Cremier abstaining. And for the applicants, I'm. You know my thoughts on. I'm not making it worse. I don't know that there's a better answer out there, but I owe it to the town to one, comply with our regulations, and two, determine why it might not be feasible if we were to ask that. Matt, you or anybody on your team have any questions on that particular Hearing's closed. We can talk, Jen. You close the hearing. Okay.
With that, so I will ask the applicant's lawyer to help me out here with how do we get feedback from the applicant on that without having, we didn't need to have a public hearing to begin with, so I have to be able to get feedback on the issue. Might be at the next meeting. Mr. Chairman? Yes.
I'm only going to speak to you right now on the procedural aspects. Not on the merits of the application because you had it, you chose to have a public hearing. You had a public hearing and conducted it in accordance with all the correct rules for public hearings. And the hearing is closed. So we cannot address the commission with regard to substantive issues that relate to this application. So, you now have to decide whether or not to approve the site plan or to deny the site plan. In terms of addressing issues that are basically new issues being raised as part of the site plan process. I've never been in this position before where you've closed a hearing on us. And we really can't. So you unfortunately have to take action on the application as it was heard at the public hearing. Okay. And we cannot come back and address it. We have to file another application, I believe. Okay.
If I may just say one thing for the record, that's not a final opinion. I do reserve the rights to look at the procedural aspects a little bit further, but this is an unusual situation.
I agree with you. And so I am not going to act on this application tonight. I will also confer with Andover's land use attorney because I wasn't expecting this to be the roadblock that it was to it seems like kind of a simple thing to upset the apple cart at this point, but I do think that it is consistent with what our regulations require at this point. So with that in mind, we will continue this item at our next meeting on May 16. So next item under old business is the update on the affordable housing plan. Bill is still here. I think we've seen the plan, read through the plan, and Bill's present to entertain any questions or comments that we might have on the plan. And I'll start with you, Agent Halsey.
Yeah, I view the plan and I think it's well done. I do have one comment though. Information relative to the rental figures, I think it should be made clear that those are in fact gross rents. I know that term is not everybody uses that, but those those red figures, I believe, are include utilities. I was wondering if perhaps that could could appear somewhere in there just so give some clarity to the to the to the plan for for those who read it.
Yes, Jim is right. That is correct. I'll clarify that. Thank you. Any other questions, Jim? No, I'm good. Any of the commission members? Anne? Not at the moment. Okay, Scott? Oh, I have nothing. Steve?
First, I want to say Bill, very thorough report. I learned a lot by reading it and I probably didn't spend enough time trying to digest all the details, but what I'm trying to understand, I understand how you came up with the recommended goal, but it's not clear to me what proactive measures you're recommending we take as a town to meet the goals or whether is it just market conditions are gonna allow us to hit that target?
What we talk about is creating a committee and what I've always found is that to have a plan that stays alive and is implemented you need some kind of committee that takes ownership of it, But also that committee needs some kind of staff person to staff it, so there's somebody day to day that's also pushing for it. So that's recommended in there. And so then when you have the committee and then really what it comes down to is when the rubber hits the road is when you're really going to need money. So we we indicated the creation of a housing trust fund to create a sort of pot of money to assist people in creating accessory affordable apartments, helping people age in place and whatnot, and creating tax abatement programs. Then the recommendations go through and talk about all the different things. So really creating a committee for ownership, creating some type of source of funding that is recurring, that's a revolving fund to start putting out money to start implementing these things. Because you know, I mean the accessory apartment can be affordable if it's deed restricted for ten years, which is pretty reasonable. So if you said we can give you a grant and we will give you a tax abatement on the improvement that might be something that someone's interested in doing. And then it goes on and on to talk about new development and that might be I put in there one of the sections, one of the final sections was the financial
and economic reality of affordable housing. And that might be where the town meeting says, hey, we should create a tax abatement program if you're going to provide affordable housing to try and make it more affordable. You, of course, as the Planning and Zoning Commission can make the regulation so the process is much more streamlined so that you can come in and you can build, let's say a four or five unit complex just as of right rather than requiring special permits and zone changes and whatnot. There's a lot of recommendations in there but it really starts with really getting
going is creating a committee and ownership and some type of funding source. Great. Thanks, Bill. Sure. William? I don't see any Lee Ann Blanchard? No questions. Kevin? I have no questions. I don't either, sorry.
Okay, yep, thanks Leanne. I don't have any other questions right this minute either, Bill. I want to thank you for what I thought was a great education and a great plan. And as I look at what I think our way ahead is, you know, Bill got back to me and I, you know, there's a couple of dates that were flying around. Does this thing need to be done by the June 1 or the June 30? And I think the latest date out there is the June 1, and so, we'll meet that date. But my looking at the way ahead is I'm thinking that I will go to the Board of Selectmen meeting that they have on May 9 and talk to them about briefing them. I wish I knew more how long the brief that I give is going to take because that would be the first question they will ask me is how much time do you need? And those guys have been very busy with budget season. I do think they need to hear it. Do you agree with that, Scott? Yes. And so it I'll tell them I need an hour, hour and a half. I think it's going be like an hour and a half of their time at some point, whether it's a special meeting or I just can't see doing it in one of the regular Board of Selectmen meetings because they go so long. But I'll try to get with them to tell them where we are on the ninth.
I was looking at holding the public workshop on Saturday, May 14. We had a public workshop, I think it was last Saturday, about the community center, but that went pretty well. I would ask for people on the Commission to attend that with me just to show support as well as Bill if he's available, but you know provide information to the town. At that point, I would hope to act on the plan at the planning and zoning meeting on the sixteenth and after that, we file with the town clerk and we're essentially done. Bill, I was looking and I know we talked, you said somewhere we got to submit it to the state and I was today trying to go through different articles, finding out where or to who, you know, and I kind of remember it being, yeah, I remember seeing it someplace, but I can't find it, where it says who I submitted to at the state level. Everything just says that you file it on your website and file with the town clerk and you're done.
Yeah, it's the State Department of Housing and I believe they created a website to link it to. I'll find that, but State Department of Housing, with formal letter from the town saying, Yep. Here it
So I think that's our path to be done by the first of June. Anybody, Bill or any of the Commission members, any comments on that? Okay. Thank you so much, Bill. You have a great job. I learned a lot. I guess, so my thought, you know, when we embarked on this journey and Bill talked to us about the currently existing affordable housing, natural affordable housing, I said, well, why do we need this plan? You know, what the heck? Andover's affordable. And then we were getting close to the end and my thought was, well, gee whiz, there's a lot of good things we can do for the seniors in this town
and for some of the young folks starting out. All the affordable housing is kind of old and that, so this is a good thing for the town. And then I took the next iteration a day or so later and I said, no, this isn't only a good thing for the town, it's an absolute necessity for the town. See the senior population going up, the town number of residents going down, And if we don't do something to make the town affordable to live in, there's going be nobody here to pay the taxes. And so I think it is crucial, that was where I thought I needed to take the time to explain it to the Board of Selectmen. Hopefully I can do it as well as you did to us, Bill. But that was my course reversal through the period of time that we were talking on this. So thank you very much for your help and you're not done yet, but you're pretty close to the finish line.
Thank you, thank you and that and you really hit the nail on the head with the seniors and the people, the younger people not moving in. You know, it's really when you think ten years out, it really starts to get to be a scary kind of thing, whether it's in my hometown here at Middlefield or Durham or Haddon where I work, it it's all the same demographic for small towns and it could be very scary. So thank you very much. Thank you, Bill. Thanks, Bill. Thank you, Scott. Thank you.
Have a good night. Thanks, Bill. Moving on to the next item is the request for the Economic Development Commission regarding entryway signage for the town of Vandu. Elaine, I think you're the only person Yeah, I'm not left, on so Hanging in there. Everybody else failed.
Yeah, they expected I was the one who was going to talk about it anyway. Welcome to Andover signs, you know, we we were in agreement on the long term planning committee that we needed to welcome Andover signs, I think maybe forty five years ago we had them they got. Vandalized and taken down, and that was the end of that you know, and I was a selectman several years ago. And anytime you brought up welcome and or signs the the answer was always Oh, no, they'll just vandalize it we're not going to spend the money forget about it. You know we have to brand our town, a little bit better. So that people recognize that you know they're in the town of the Andover and now we're going to have you know, a retail store on Route 6 and maybe we'll be able to get some other things and Route 6 in the Andover
section. Of Route 6, so it would be nice to have some welcome to Andover signs and abby I don't know I sent you the sign. Don't know if you can show that on the screen. Did you get that? I emailed it to you. But anyway, while Abby's looking. So we've been trying to get a welcome to Andover sign ever since 2019. And we have a sign, we had a sign designed that was like eight by eight, it was a pretty large sign that was designed by art art from art signs in Ellington and it was beautiful it kind of it kind of makes you think about covered bridge. You see it, and it was a beautiful sign, but it was it wasn't cheap, it was $5,000 apiece for the two sides it was $10,000
and so I approached it with CIP with the Board of Finance with the Board of Selectmen trying to get $10,000 to go ahead and get these welcome to Andover signs done. And and and it's been a no go for a couple years now, and so now I'm going to Community fund and I went to the Community fund last year. For 10,000 and they didn't give me anything, But now, we're going for one sign and I got it redesigned it's a little bit cheaper it's now $4,000 a piece for the signs. And so we're going to the community fund and and the Community fund says, well, we need to know you know if you've talked to zoning about it. Oh, there we go Thank you very much there's there's the welcome to Andover sign the new one that's been proposed seven feet tall and it's about six feet wide.
Like the little proper sign proper is four feet, but then you've got a little you know foot or a little bit longer on either side for the post, but it kind of looks like the entrance into the covered bridge. I like you know we may go through some other iterations of designs and stuff like that so now what I need to know because we've never done this before is what kind of permits what kind of permissions what what do we need to write up to be able to actually install these signs along Route 6. If we if they ever materialize if we ever get funding for them. I know, and I know that along Route 6 is it the 12 feet in from the road is state slash town property and then it's private property Those are quick that I have. And if this six foot wide sign, and it has to go in a little bit because of site, you know, it's going along Route 6, you don't want to be blocking site at all.
If, if we remain keep it on the 12 feet, then is that land dually owned by the state in the town, Or do we have to go to the state because it's their property too?
So I'll take a crack at it. And let me say right off the bat that I think it's a beautiful sign. Yeah, I like it. It does. Went through our sign regulations today. I find that it's consistent with our signs. Town is allowed to have just about whatever sign it wants Okay. In the revision that's coming out, we changed it just a little bit. Town can put up whatever sign it wants as long as it doesn't exceed 16 square feet, which your sign doesn't. Four by four works out perfectly with that. Right, Jed, the sign itself? The sign itself.
Yeah. Okay, good. So all that being said, I think, yeah, feedback I got from Jim was that, nope, the state owns that property alongside the state highway. And so I went to the state DOT website today trying to educate myself just a little bit on the way ahead that it might be. And it was not exactly straightforward. But I will send you the path that I went to get to where it talks about highway signing policy and programs. Okay. And it's got a little application on there. And it says, well, there's about five different things in there. One of them is the instructions for it, one of them is the form, one of them is what the requirements are. And they said, gee whiz, this is not really straightforward. Maybe this is a good thing for one of those UConn students to do as a homework project to help us out is figure out how to get that signed through the state DOT so they approve it. Okay, I think it's doable. I think it makes sense. Think it's a beautiful sign, but I think it does fall under the purview in this case of the state DOT that is not town property out there.
Okay, so zoning doesn't come into play or does it?
Well, so when you pull up the application, it says, is the sign approved by the town planning and zoning? Yes, or NA? I would be happy to create a motion that approves this sign if that's what it takes to get it done. But somebody's got to do a little bit of homework coming up with what's out there. I think it's got to be easy. We see these signs along Route 66 going into Hebron, a very similar kind of sign and that sort of thing. I would ask that somebody go look at the Connecticut DOT website a little bit on signs, see if they can find their way through. And if you want planning and zoning to make a motion on approving it, can vote on it
and do that. But I do think it is consistent with our regulations anyhow.
Okay, good. And I mean, that kind of approval should wait until the signs are going to exist. Right now it's hypothetical. I have no money, so the signs don't exist. But in case I could get money, I want to move forward on it, you know, but definitely I wanted to know the rules.
It is, is the $4,000 price tag does that include you putting the sign into place.
Nope, nope, we got that would be more money for that. Yeah, we're gonna have it was 500 a piece for installation installation. And I think we'd get public works to do it. Okay. But, you know, I don't know to me $5,500 doesn't sound that bad. You know that's relatively
cheap. Thought that it would cost my request now 4,500
to go include installation. You know because it's not cheap to have public works do stuff. And, you know, and I would like to have someone do it who does signs for a living, who installs them. I think I think I've just upped the price tag to 4,500 per sign to include installation. Now I have on. So when it comes to where the signs are going to go. I have looked at Route 6 and went on GIS and driven up and down. And pretty much the sign, the first sign I want to, if I only get one sign, the one I want to concentrate on is the one coming from Bolton. And it's so it's right past the Coventry line pretty much across the street from network, the network building. So that's where I'm thinking of putting it. And if we can stay within the 12 feet, then that's the state property, it is
owned by Linda Adamson owns it, you know, beyond that, so I don't know what happens there, but I'm going to try to keep it within that 12 feet, so that we're not dealing with personal property and coming in from Columbia. The best place to put it is right before Parker Bridge Road. And that's like right, right near the Columbia line and past a guardrail. And actually, that is DOT property and they own it. It's like, like the whole piece that goes back. So it's like, okay, so I'll definitely be talking to them about that and say, hey, you own the rest of this parcel that I want to put this sign on. Well, I'm sure that's why the state wants to
weigh in on it because it's a it's a light issue and all that with the traffic out there.
Okay. All right, good. That sounds good. Now I now I understand how it works. Got my marching orders and it would be lovely if these signs come into fruition at some some point. You know, was hoping for the one hundred and seventy fifth next year, but, you know, I got to get the money. Understand. Okay. Thanks Elaine.
That's it. Thank you. The signs are beautiful Elaine too. Nice. Great
job. So I keep sticking with him. Know, other people keep saying, oh, we can get somebody, you know, schools to do it for free or whatever. Said, I really don't want to cheap out on Andover I want it to be nice. Yeah.
Okay the next issue up is sign regulations And Abby, if you can allow me to share my screen again. You should be able to. Give it a shot.
Okay, so last month when we talked sign issues, there were two comments that I took away from the crowd. One is that we should make, you know, on the wall signs on a building, we were eliminating it to 15 inches. Was, I think, consensus that we could make that 18. I six zero one half a dozen of another to me. Think our our sign square footage is fairly restrictive. So we're not going to get the world's biggest signs. I was surprised to see that the retail store, when they showed their signs there, they stayed using an 18 inches letter within the 50 square feet total signage that we permitted and and we're able to comply with our our sign requirements, so I changed that from 15 to 18. Based on that discussion, and at this point, if there's anybody that that thinks that that's not the right thing to do, I kind of like to hear that a little bit. Seems kind of straightforward. Okay. The other change we did, the
other discussion we had was we thought we were being a little too restrictive on window signs. And so what I did in both, you know, the 15 inches and putting the number in here were recommendations from our attorney, not that they have to be that way, but the Southington rules that you know we kind of used as a model didn't have a maximum square footage, so they just had not to exceed 25% of the available business fronted window area, which is what ours is revised to say. That is where I am based on the proposed changes we talked about a month ago. And with that, my thought is that I am ready to send these to Attorney Branch and let him take a cut on them. And after he's done that, we'll have Jim send them out to wherever you know, the capital region, council of government towns that get to take a look at our stuff there. So any comments on those two changes to the sign ramps?
Hey, Jed, would the two gas stations be able to comply with the 25% regulation?
Certainly the one at the corner of 316 would not, At least I don't think it would. I look at it, they've got pretty much all their windows done over. I don't think this is a grandfathered issue, but right this minute they're not allowed to have any window signs at all. We're helping them out a little bit if we go out there and try to get that to comply with what we're doing. And I think that's reasonable. Okay, thanks.
Okay, I will forward these over to Attorney Branch then and let him take a chop on that. Next thing on the agenda was other regulatory amendments. I was going to show you the chart of all the different little things like including frontage and all that tonight and tell you that I was waiting for attorney branch to get back to me on that because I sent them all back to him. And lo and behold, he sent me back your comments on just about every one of those things this afternoon. I hadn't had a chance to get through it. And so we won't talk about that anymore tonight. I need to go out and take a look at what
Mark Branch provided to us and we'll look at those next time. So we were thinking Jim and I about setting a public hearing for June, but I think we'll wait until I have a clear shot at victory on that through Mark Branch before we set the public hearing. New business, I guess we took care of that. Move on to Item seven, discussion. Any discussion on the Commission at this point? Can I ask a question about the sign regulations? Yes, we can. Go ahead.
About the 25% window coverage that you showed and that Steve asked about, is that I think I had talked a little bit last month about how I felt like it's I don't think it's too intrusive now given the amount of things that they have to advertise. So, I'm just wondering if this is a bit limiting. You know, in other words, I'm not sure that it's gonna adversely affect anybody if it stays close to the way it is, I guess is my point.
I, so I thought I would use as a test case the application at 580 Lake Road, and I was pleased that they came up with a signed plan that I thought met our regulations. Given that, so if we were to approve these somewhat maybe restrictive signed regulations, maybe not, I don't know. I've got one of one case that shows they work, which is one more that I had as we started reviewing them. But as we saw with the gas station across the street, if they don't like what we've got, and they think they've got a valid reason to need more, they can go to the zoning board of appeals and seek relief that way. And if that doesn't work and we think we're too restrictive, we can modify the regulations again. I know these regulations are not perfect.
I was trying to fix before the election season comes up here this year, the questions of what to do with temporary political signs and making sure that we're not violating anybody's constitutional right to free speech. And I think we have done that. But a perfect set of regulations, they are not. Okay.
Any other discussion? Okay, moving on to item eight, approval of the meeting minutes. I move that the meeting minutes from March 21, regular meeting, be approved. Second. Second.
Okay, I got Leanne down as a second on that one. Thank you, Leanne. Any comments on those minutes? I did note, you know, we had talked about the fact that there were a couple of last names missing from the attendees there. I don't think we need the last names for attendees. We should try hard to get the last name for each person who is commenting. And I think we did that. There might be one where we got the last initial. And I certainly didn't know who that was. I think we were okay on if somebody was attending and we didn't have their full name, that not the end of the world. Any other comments on those minutes? Hearing none, we'll call for a vote. Anne? Aye. Scott? Aye. Steve? Aye. Leanne? Aye.
And I vote aye as well. That motion passes five zero zero. I make a motion to approve the special meeting minutes from 03/28/2022. Second.
Thank you, Steve. Any comments on those meeting minutes? And I had none. Hearing none, we'll call for a vote. Leigh Ann? Aye. Scott? Aye. Steve? Aye. Leigh Ann? Aye.
And I vote aye as well. Motion passes five-zero-zero. Any correspondence, Jim?
Commissioner Larson, did we overlook the public hearing minutes? The minutes for the March 21 public hearing?
Maybe we overlooked putting it into the motion. We certainly didn't overlook it because we talked about the others present not having their names there. But for sake of being correct, I'll make a motion to approve the public hearing minutes from 03/21/2022. I'll second it. Thank you, Anne. Any discussion on the public hearing minutes? Hearing none, take vote in. Aye.
Scott? Aye. Steve? Aye. Leanne? Aye. I vote aye as well. The motion passes five-zero-zero. Thanks for keeping us honest there, Jim. And no correspondence before you. Okay. Administrative reports.
Okay. Number of enforcement actions, 12th Center Street is actually moving forward with the demolition of the structure. It's moving fairly slowly. Did speak to the owner today, indicated someone would be back this week working on it. Eyesore at Route 6 with the with the with the RVs, there's been some action. Have had dialogue with owner of the property who's out of state, but has apparently made some sort of arrangement to at least proceed with the RVs, have been demoed and are lying in rubble hopefully to to be carted away shortly. That will be following up on that. I've had no progress contacting mister Barnett across the street at they believe it's I I don't have the the number the street number, but the old where the old food truck was and and a lot of garbage. I I'm trying to track him down. I have a few other complaints that I'm I'm trying to get to. One on sort of a dumpster issue on Long Hill Road, and I'll be following up on that tomorrow, and that's all I have.
Okay. Yeah
I don't have anything that we've acted on of interest planning and zoning for begin with weapons.
Jim, does the owner live at the place where you're having a hard time getting a hold of him? Mr. Barnett?
No, he does not. I I believe he lives elsewhere in town. I'm tracking him down. I don't I don't believe he lives there. He hasn't responded to my correspondence. I'm gonna see if he's on-site. He seems to I've never I haven't seen him there in a long time, but I haven't looked that closely either. I I think I can find him. The address on the property card is is the his the Route 6 address, but he doesn't appear to be residing there.
Anything else, Scott? No. Moving on to public speak, Diane, I think you're the last one hanging in there.
Yes, I'm still hanging in here. Always fun to listen in. And that's all I'm doing is just listening in. I have no comments. I think you guys do a great job. Particularly Jed, I think you hold a great meeting. You're a great chairman and I thank you and thank everybody for all they do. Thank you.
It doesn't feel like it right this Next regular meeting is May 16 at 07:00. As I say, I'll work to get something together on May 14 for the public. There's a couple of hoops, you know, advertising that that sort of thing. The biggest part is I just got to, you know, try to get together a presentation and make it flow a little smooth and sitting here by myself doesn't work as good as it used to be when I had a team of guys that we could wrestle with putting it together. So I'm working on that. I'll get my wife to beat me up and murder board me on coming up with the presentation here. But I do think there will be some interest. I think there's some good things we can do, and that'll be that. All that being said, I make a motion that we adjourn. I'll second that. Thank you, Anne. All in favor, raise your hand. Guess I need Leanne, a yep, okay, aye. Any opposed? Thank you very much, everybody. Obviously, well, got some homework to do before the next one to see if we can find our way out of this particular pickle and more to follow. Thanks for attending. Thanks for hanging in with me. Good night, everybody. Thank you.