Okay, we should be good to go.

Okay.

I'd like to welcome everyone and call tonight's uh zoning board special meeting to order.

I'm David Stein, Chair of the Zoning Board, and it is 637 on October 20th, 2025.

The members of the board and the staff are holding this meeting by Teams Video Conference.

The public is in attendance both on video conference and by telephone.

I'd like to first do a roll call of the board and the staff.

Bill Morris.

Here.

Roseanne McManus.

Here.

Jerry Bozak.

Present.

And now the staff, Ralph Blessing.

Present.

Good.

Thank you.

The board's microphones will be open throughout tonight's meeting.

The applicant's mics will be open during the public hearing when their application is being heard.

However, I would ask the applicant to please mute their mics when not speaking in order to reduce background noise.

The first part of tonight's meeting is the public hearing during which the public will have the opportunity to speak.

Here's the procedure for the public to let us know if you would like to speak.

If you came in through Teams, please use the raise your hand function and you will be unmuted when it is your turn to speak.

We will call on you.

If you called in on one of the telephone conference call phone numbers, please press star five and this will raise your hand, then press star six to unmute when you are called on to speak.

When members of the public speak, please state your name and address for the record and whether you are in favor of or opposed to the application.

If you are having trouble getting on, um you're raising your hand and nothing's happening or some other issue, please send an email to uh Ralph Blessing, um Bureau Chief of the Land Use Bureau, um, who is uh here tonight's meeting and uh his email address is R Blessing, B L E S S-I-N-G at Stanford CT.gov.

Uh and Ralph will try to get you on.

The board requests that members of the public please limit your comments to three minutes so that everyone will have a chance to speak.

The meeting is being recorded and will be posted at the zoning board's website.

Uh you can find the agenda for tonight's meeting as well as the meeting applications and all of the materials for each application by going to our website www.stanford ct.gov slash zoning.

Now um can we get a uh motion please to uh take the agenda out of order and start with uh items uh five and six so moved there a second a second okay all in favor say aye aye aye okay we are taking the agenda out of order uh starting with item five um just so the public will know um items five and six are 120 Longridge, which is the um conversion of the existing office building into uh apartments and item six is 120-c Longridge, which is the um townhouse project.

Um both of these um just to uh let you know ahead of time will be uh continued and not heard tonight.

So application 225-28, 120 Long Ridge, LLC, 120 Longridge, Stanford, Connecticut, site and architectural plans and or requested uses and special permit.

Applicants proposing to convert existing office building uh into 196 apartments with 808 parking spaces and associated amenities.

Um Roseanne, could you please read the uh planning board letter?

Certainly.

Dated October 9th, 2025 to Mr.

David Stein, Chair, City of Stanford Zoning Board regarding ZD application number 225-28, Lisa Feinberg, Carmedy Torrent, Sandak, and Hennessey LLP representing 120 Long Ridge LLC.

Dear Mr.

Stein and members of the zoning board.

During its regularly scheduled meeting held on Tuesday, October 7th, 2025, the planning board reviewed the above captioned application, referred in accordance with the requirements of the Stanford Charter.

Applicant is proposing to convert an existing office building into 196 apartments with 808 parking spaces and associated associated amenities.

Lisa Feinberg, partner Carmade Torrent, Sandek and Hennessy LLP made a presentation and answered questions from the board.

After considerable discussion by a vote of three one and one in favor, Godzino, Linder, and Salad.

Opposed Levin abstain.

Not sure if I announce it right.

Mr.

Levin supports the project, but voted in opposition due to the applicant electing for a fee in lieu instead of below market rate units on site.

The board found this to be in general harmony with the comprehensive plan category MU2 mixed use community campus.

Sincerely Stanford Planning Board, Jennifer Gazzino, Chair.

Good.

Thank you.

Ralph, did we receive the certificate of mailing on this application?

Yes, we did.

Okay.

And assigned.

And good.

Okay, thank you.

Um, so application 225-28 is being continued until the next meeting of the zoning board, which will take place on November 10th at 6 30 p.m.

on teams.

Now the next application we have is application 225-29, 120C Longridge LLC, and toll Northeast V 4, 120C Longridge Road, site and architectural plans and/or requested uses and special permit.

Applicants proposing to construct 44 two-story carriage homes and 58 three-story townhouses with associated improvements and amenities.

Yes, dated October 9th, 2025 to Mr.

David Stein Chair, City of Stanford Zoning Board regarding ZB application number 225-29120C Longridge LLC.

Dear Mr.

Stein and members of the zoning board, during its regularly scheduled meeting held on Tuesday, October 7th, 2025, the planning board reviewed the above captioned application referred in accordance with the requirements of the Stanford Charter.

Applicant is proposing to construct 44 two-story carriage homes and 58 three-story townhomes with associated improvements and amenities.

Lisa Feinberg, Carmade Torrent, Sandack, and Hennessey, LLP made a presentation and answered questions from the board.

After considerable discussion by a vote of 32 to 0 in favor, Gonzino, Linder, Salett, opposed Levin and Submanian.

The planning board recommended approval of ZD application number 225-29.

Mr.

Levin and Mr.

Sub Romanian support the housing types, but voted in opposition as they felt there are too many units for the site.

Tree removal will be excessive.

The board found this to be in general harmony with the comprehensive plan category MU2 mixed use community campus.

Sincerely Stamford Planning Board, Jennifer Gazzino, Chair.

Okay.

Ralph, did we receive the certificate of mailing on this application?

Yes, we did.

And the sign appidavit.

Yes, we did.

Okay, good.

Would you like to move that we go back into regular order?

Hold on.

Just one sec.

So application 225-29 is continued until the zoning board meeting on November 10th at 6:30 p.m.

on teams.

So for the public, these two applications for 120 long reach.

Okay, Roseanne, you're on.

Like to move that we go back to the regular order of the agenda.

Second that.

Okay.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay.

We are back in the regular order.

And the first item we have is uh application 225-27, horn and hoof properties, 961 Long Ridge Road and 16 Wire Mill Road, site and architectural plans and or requested uses and special permit.

Applicant is proposing to construct nine independent living three bedroom dwelling units with parking landscaping and other related improvements.

Yes, sir.

Mind it spirit.

Okay.

Um I'm not seeing you.

Are you on camera?

I I can see myself on camera and I can see you.

Could anybody else not see me?

I can I can't see you.

But it's like with Jerry's Jerry's goes in and out too.

So can't see you.

I turned it on and off.

You might be better off.

Heard and not seen.

I don't know why it's it's it it looks to me like I'm on.

Yeah.

Not now.

No.

Huh.

Um I don't know.

It's it's showing it's showing that I'm on, and I I could see myself, so I don't know why.

Uh how about the camera?

The camera has the uh hash across it.

No, yeah, that's off.

And then let me turn it on again.

Turn it back on.

Anything?

No.

No.

Well, I think what's more important is can I share my screen?

Right?

Uh can you try that?

Yeah.

Yeah, let's see if we can share my screen because you're sharing it says.

He is the presenter.

Um, I can also see Mr.

D'Andrea.

Uh who's who I also made a presenter.

So I did the same thing for both of them.

Yeah.

Maybe Joe, Joe, on the very top of the screen.

Did you make sure your camera does not have the line go across at the very top of the screen?

That's what I did.

Yeah.

Mr.

D'Andrea, do you have the material that Attorney Capalbo wants to share?

I'm looking.

Okay, I definitely have our site plan set.

Um that may do it for us.

It may.

Right, let's see.

Oh, yes.

There you are.

You see now.

Is that better?

Yep.

Can see you.

I don't even think they can hear me now.

No, we can hear you.

We can hear you.

There you are.

Okay.

All right.

No problem.

Yeah.

I'm not seeing it still.

It was on and then it went off, just like Jerry's.

But the sharing the screen is the most important thing.

No, we lost him.

We totally lost him.

Interesting.

Maybe it's trying to log on again.

Yeah.

Okay.

She should be coming on as a presenter again.

Can you see me now?

No.

No.

I don't even see where you're there.

You are on the page.

Third page, I see you.

Yeah.

Move him up to the first page or does it not work like that?

It doesn't work like that, unfortunately.

Usually when you start talking, you um you show up.

Yeah.

Yep, there you are.

There you are.

Can you hear me?

Yeah.

We can.

Um all right.

So I'm sorry about that.

I don't know why.

Okay.

Joe, just uh with us.

Just a procedural matter.

It it's the policy of the board that any materials that uh an applicant wants considered have to be delivered to the board by Friday before the meeting.

You dropped a whole slew of things on us today.

In fact, it was this afternoon, um, which not all of us have even had a chance to read.

Um we're gonna try to go through as best we can, but I gotta tell you next time we're just gonna continue your hearing.

I understand.

Yeah, I uh it seemed like you you should have been aware of this policy before.

Um so please don't let this happen again.

No, I I apologize.

Unfortunately, you know, we had a meeting with the with the land use staff and with the um architect and with the building department, and by the time we got everybody together, it was the middle of last week.

And so it just became impossible.

I I apologize for that, it won't happen again, and I would understand if you had to continue the meeting, that's for sure.

Yeah.

And we yeah.

So um I I'm not sure the best way to do this.

Maybe if you just for each of the items that you delivered, why don't you bring it up and explain the well?

Let me back up.

The other issue is you didn't give us any explanation of what the item was.

You didn't say I'm delivering to you this site plan in order to show you that I've complied with your request to put in additional landscaping in the top right corner.

So all we get is a site, uh, you know, a plan, no idea what it's supposed to be satisfying.

Um so that also is it creates a lot more work for the board.

So don't do that again, please.

I apologize and it won't happen again.

Any anything you deliver, we need to know what it is, why you're delivering it and what requirement it is supposed to satisfy.

Yeah, I understand.

I was uh had my hair on fire today just trying to get it all in, but I understand the position to put you in, and I'll make sure it doesn't happen again.

Okay.

Um why don't you um let's let's start off with application 225-27, I believe it is, right?

Uh we have that's that is the application we're currently hearing.

Okay.

So um why don't we just go through the items that the board requested and as we go through you show us what it is you provided and how that meets that request.

Sure.

Fair enough.

Uh the first item I have is the answers to Representative Weinberg's questions.

Yes, those were actually submitted a week ago.

Um and there is a it's a it's a three-page narrative that was submitted, and I'd be happy to go through every one of them if you'd like.

Um but did anyone on the board get that?

I'm going back through.

See if I missed it.

What day did you submit it?

Um it was and was it Ralph, has that been posted to our site?

October 15th.

15th.

Okay, that would be last Wednesday.

Um that sounds about Ralph, is that on the site?

Uh I'm not sure.

Let me check.

I don't see it in any of our emails.

Okay.

So um that's an item that the board still needs to get and um I want to review.

So maybe maybe what happened was that we uh wanted to wait for all the other material.

And when all the other materials came in today, we might have forgotten to add this one.

Okay.

Um that happens, but it it just means that um we still need it.

And it needs to get posted to the site.

Um let's um let's keep going.

Um color renderings, 3D of the groupings of the homes.

Can you just pull that up?

Uh please.

Sure.

Can you share my screen?

Can I share my screen here?

And then I'll uh you should be able to do that.

Okay.

Was that sent to us?

No.

The the uh PowerPoint was not sent to you.

You sent it?

No.

My PowerPoint.

I think the I sent that uh render.

It wouldn't, it's a 3D rendering.

I don't think it'd be a PowerPoint, would it?

It's in a PowerPoint.

You do have the 3D rendering, and I included the 3D rendering in the PowerPoint.

The rendering was forwarded to you.

When was that?

Does that afternoon?

That was today.

In okay, why don't you bring it up and uh let's go through it?

Sure.

You see it?

So it's front and front and back of each group of buildings.

So take us through each group, please.

Sure.

So this is a group of buildings, right?

Four.

Um you can see the front, obviously.

There's a parking space in front of each building and a garage.

Um and then which group is this.

This would be the well, I'll tell you in one second.

This is the group on the left side.

Here's the group here are both, right?

So the group on the left side is there they're identical buildings, right?

One is four units, one is five units.

Um the front of the units look like the following, right?

And mirrored on the other side of the street.

The back of the units.

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry, let's see the back of the four.

And the back of the units look like this.

They all look the same, whether it's four or five.

So we wanted to see that for ourselves.

It's right here.

It's yeah, it's up, it's up.

I'm just seeing one unit.

Am I missing?

Oh, I see what you're saying.

So we asked to see the all of the groupings.

Yeah.

All right.

You can only see two.

I only have the back of two units, right?

They're all the same.

They're all consistent.

And then all of the units in a 3D look as follows.

Okay.

Let's see the five.

The five are no different than the four.

I only sent the four.

We asked for we asked for both of them.

Well, then I apologize.

Um, I I sent the front of what they all look like, the rear of what they all look like, and a 3D of all of the units together.

I I don't have the five, they're no different than the four.

That's fine.

Um, but that wasn't what our request was.

Um okay.

Why don't you get that for the next meeting, please?

Sure.

Can we keep going through this PowerPoint?

Sure.

Uh so yeah, what else do you have?

The um PowerPoint.

Yeah.

So of course we have um the individual units and what they look like um without being grouped together.

But the most important thing I think that we need to discuss is and in the big issue last time was what does or what do you slow down?

Um let's just keep going through the list, please.

Okay.

Um next item.

I think staff, this was a staff item, a letter from TTP saying no need for a new and updated traffic study um to take into account 800 and 900 Longridge.

Right.

So I contacted um no, I contacted uh Luke Buttonweiser.

He didn't he wasn't sure he would be able to provide that for tonight's meeting, but I do have the inner office memorandum from the department, and this is dated August 9th.

Um so I don't know how much more updated we can get than what's here.

And of course, in this um in this memorandum to the board, it says that there does not appear to be any adverse impact on traffic and parking.

Um he wasn't able to, you know, I don't know what's happened between August 9th and today.

Uh unfortunately, he wasn't able to sign something to say that uh to file something to say that he wasn't able to update it.

But this is pretty recent.

Okay, just get us Ralph.

Would you get something so we have it in the file, please?

Uh yes, I can reach out to them.

Uh next meeting.

Yeah, it's also that um uh as you may know, uh the traffic bureau chief has resigned.

So they're a little bit trolled staff at the moment.

Sure.

Okay.

Um but this was on the list for tonight.

Um let's see what's next.

Um then we have the um uh ADA accessibility.

Um Joe, why don't you address that please?

Sure.

So, and then that's really you know the elephant in the room.

So the the you know, quite quite honestly, the the regulations aren't clear on what that means.

So we uh met with uh land use staff.

We met with the building department, and we all met at the same time, we met downtown to try to determine exactly how this would work and what's the best way it would work for all involved, right?

We have 55 and older seniors, we have those with disabilities.

One thing I never thought of is when you talk about people with disabilities.

I was assuming all along it was somebody in a wheelchair.

Not necessarily, it could be somebody who's blind, it could be somebody who's deaf.

There's a lot of different disabilities that need to be taken into consideration.

Okay.

So the question is, well, how do you construct these?

And uh Mr.

Fischel, who's the architect who was at the meeting was there that day, and I'm gonna let him explain it in more detail than I ever can.

But at the end of the day, I think what they decided upon, when I say they, I mean the staff and the building department, the architect, the engineer, everybody was there, was that as you know, Mr.

Chairman, there are different types of um characteristics with respect to uh the level of accessibility that one might need.

And I think it was determined that at the end of the day, if we provide a type B unit, which we'll explain, um, that will satisfy what is the minimum necessary in order to build these units.

On top of that, on top of the requirements of a type B unit, and the type B unit requires requires wider doors, uh wider aisleways, a specific bathroom design, and so forth.

But what we would also provide in this case is a zero threshold.

And by that I mean that there is um no uh step to get into this dwelling in any way, right?

Either through the front door and in this particular case, the front door, the garage or the rear.

Um we're also providing wider doors and aisles than are required under the um type B type unit.

We're also going to provide um levers instead of doorknobs.

You know, one of the advantages that we had in discussing this was Len, who's on has a um a daughter who is um has some disabilities.

So he was very helpful in trying to determine what would be useful and what would be easy.

So at the at the end of the day, the circle diameters that are necessary for a wheelchair will all be apparent on one floor.

You know, there's only regulations say one floor.

When these regulations get amended to better define what we're doing here, we should probably say the first floor, right?

Um, but there would be no need to move walls, right?

These these walls would be uh um they'll have more structural integrity than most walls because they will be uh built so that they could provide for uh what may be necessary down the road, whether you're um live gonna intend on living in place and and growing old in the unit and you need to make changes as you go along, or whether somebody with severe disabilities needs to um enter one of these facilities and you know make some minor modifications in order to uh allow them to properly live there.

So I think that um as far as um the the details of it go, Mr.

Fischel is here and he could explain it better than me.

But I think that's that's the standard that you want to meet, the minimum standard that you need to meet for these units, so that they're adaptable um for any type of um situation that may come along down the road, and they're easily adaptable.

Just to follow up, you said to go from B to A is is minor modification.

No, I didn't say that.

But you did.

You just said if it's a B, then the person living there can make minor modifications to get to A.

Well, I never mentioned anything about A, but yes.

Well, what else is it gonna go to?

Right.

Well, that's but that's true, right?

So the modifications uh would be necessary.

So you have instead, in other words, you you may not have the guardrails up in the bathroom, but the mechanisms are in place to put the guardrails up in the bathroom, right?

So whatever whatever needs to be done in order to go from B to A, um, the the infrastructure, I guess, for lack of a better term, is in place so that those things can be readily available.

Okay.

Okay.

Why don't you um introduce uh have Mr.

Fisher come on, introduce himself and explain?

Sure, he happens to be sitting next to me right here.

So here you go.

Lyle Fischell, 36 Given Avenue, Stanford, Connecticut.

I am an architect.

Uh and um I can basically say that uh I think the intent of this special permit is to create the class B units.

There are or type B, uh I always get that confused.

Type B's, which can uh then be adaptable, easily adaptable.

Not you know, you still have to put screws in the wall, you still have to put the grab bars in, you still have to take the sink cabinet away.

So you get the toe and knee space.

But the person can still be living there and not have to move out while these changes are being done.

So it's it's really an uh an aging in place.

And since these uh begin at the age of 55, there's a lot of people that uh will need this down the road, but don't need it today.

So when Ralph tries to sell these, you don't want to sell a hospital room.

You want to sell something that is uh pleasing and that you can move into at the age of 55 when you become 75 and you got a cane or a wheelchair.

You don't have to move out.

The fix is there a couple of days and you're set, I would think would be the appropriate amount of time for most of these uh minor changes, is what we will call them.

Minor changes, not to get to A, though, right?

That wouldn't get you to A.

It would get you to A, yes.

I'm confused.

Joe just said it it's not minor changes to get to A.

What the owner is providing right now will require minor changes to get to A, because we're going above and beyond what the usual type B, uh, which the usual type B doesn't even uh include turning spaces for wheelchairs.

We are including that here, not including levers for handles.

We are including that.

So we're going above what the type B would require that would then make it more aptable to become the uh type A unit.

Okay.

So just to be clear, Joe, you agree it's minor changes to get from B to A.

Well, I I'm not I'm not a uh I'm not a building.

But didn't stop you from opining a minute ago.

Well, I I don't think I said it wouldn't take more than minor changes.

All I said was the infrastructure would be in place so that the changes could be made to adopt these units to adapt these units to whatever situation is necessary.

Okay.

Um keep going, please, Mr.

Michelle.

Yeah, I mean okay.

I did uh write a letter that was delivered today, and of course we apologize for that that you could read through.

Um please.

Why did I put that up?

Because that is the uh floor plan.

So please put up the letter.

Oh my letter right.

Yeah.

So so here's the letter.

Um, you know, we're gonna read it.

We are going to build these through the um please, please wait.

Okay, please wait.

Please.

Yeah.

How's that?

Much better.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

Okay, so um, you know, we're going to build these uh to the residential code, the international residential code, which is part of the state of Connecticut building code.

These will be permitted all separately as single family dwelling units.

So there's no real guideline for ADA accessibility in the residential code, but we do realize that what you are after would be most likely the type B unit.

And the type B unit is basically modeled to become a type A unit.

So really that's kind of what I'm trying to say in this letter after my review of the plans and trying to figure out you know what would be the best way to proceed with this uh special permit.

So as I say, there's no clear cut guideline.

This is something that will have to be reviewed and determined.

Um, and uh we hope worded a little differently in the regulations as not being fully accessible, but being very adaptable, and then we can make those, in my opinion, because I do a lot of work, I do a lot of I see a lot of construction, these would be minor changes that could then bring it right up to the type A unit, which would be fully accessible.

So it's my understanding from what Benita explained to the board and sent around that type B is spelled out very clearly in the ICC guidelines.

Is she incorrect?

Uh she is right.

The ICC A117.1 2017.

Okay.

Does spell out the guidelines.

So what do you mean when you said there's no clear guidelines for type B?

Uh because the ICC does not come into play when we're dealing with just a residential IRC, the international residential code does not even uh talk about these other codes.

These are the IBC, International Building Code.

So in the IRC, there's no reference to any of these other codes.

So when you build a resident, a single family residence, you don't need to worry about accessibility.

All right.

That's not even something that you contemplate.

You build it the way the uh owner wants to build it.

But when we get to this, now we realize that you want to hold to some regulations which allow aging in place.

So this is our guideline, but it is not the code.

And that's all I try to point out in this letter is there's no for the code that we're building these under.

This is the closest thing I could come to kind of give a guideline that people could read that people could see, and yeah, we should do this and we should do that, and we should do this.

And we're doing 150% of this for the type B.

Questions, concerns?

I think David's gotten uh knocked out.

I don't see him on here.

I think he's gonna have to rejoin.

So hold on for a few minutes.

Am I right?

What a night this has been my god.

Anyway, if you read the letter, it you know, is my best justification of of the direction and the guideline that we need to kind of adhere to.

Well, while we're waiting for data, I did a lot of research on this myself, and I tend to agree with you.

I mean, for example, there's no uh there's no definition anywhere of fully accessible unit.

It does not exist.

And for us to enforce it, we don't even have a definition of what that is.

So this makes it very difficult.

And I think that uh you're doing a fairly good job in uh taking us to a point where we could make it good for uh the citizens and also the homeowners.

Yeah, we're trying to define it so that it works in this situation, right?

You you've created this regulation, and now we just need to define it so that it's clear um and practical and useful to anybody who's going to and Mr.

Chris is right there.

There is no code that exists that has deal with a residential unit.

Once again, that does not exist either.

So we have to sort of uh be a little flexible on this in my mind.

The other thing, Bill, when we're done with this, I I think we really have to talk about breaking apart the senior and the um oh, I don't think there's any question.

We have to yeah, we have to redo this.

We uh rather soon.

We should uh try to do that.

Yeah.

Um anybody here from David?

Uh Bill says you know I got an adult.

He's frozen and he's trying to get back in.

Um, listen, if he can't get back in, we could move along here.

We could no, you'd be all you're doing, redoing it twice.

Um, we may have to go back to this letter.

I'm sure he has uh some other comments on this, but uh if you want to proceed, so we keep going.

Let's go.

I'm back.

Can you hear me?

Oh, yeah.

If I hear you now, I'm back.

We can't see you.

No, huh?

That's funny.

My camera is on.

Here we go.

I'm getting there, Dave.

Am I?

I could you're we don't see you, we see a picture of you.

Cameras come in and out.

You know, the same as Jerry.

Jerry.

Jerry, it's spread.

Um there we go.

Okay.

Can you see me now?

Yeah, yes.

Okay.

Um, I didn't have anything else on the letter.

I think it it made sense to me.

Did anyone have any questions on it?

No, we had some discussion.

And well, we didn't really have any discussion on it.

Okay.

But it whether or not the uh ICC applies to residential, it is I think what we'll need to use um going forward if we're in this situation again.

Yeah.

Um, because it's the only thing we've got.

Um, okay.

Can you um take us through the revisions and the plans, please?

Sure.

Staff or Ralph, have you had a chance to look at it?

Sorry, but Ralph, yeah.

Uh which one, the plans?

Yeah, the type B revisions.

Yeah.

Uh we have not.

We um but we had a conversation with the applicant and the building department last week.

Okay, so but someone needs staff is gonna look at the plans, I think we had said.

Yeah, but Ralph, but wouldn't the building department be the governing agency for lack of a better term regarding this situation?

Whether it meets so uh the issue is actually that uh what um Mr.

Fischell um stated before is that uh the buildings are built after the residential uh building code, which doesn't have any ADA requirements.

Um the building department now understands that they basically what we want is uh that we have compliance uh according to the IBC.

So uh they are aware um of um uh what we are looking for, what the zoning board is looking for, um, and obviously be uh the the zoning uh uh land use bureau zoning staff will also review um those application uh those those plans as well.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Mr.

Fachelle, why don't you continue, please?

Yeah, okay.

So um we changed the bathroom design around.

Uh we needed certain clearances.

We needed the five feet from the the wall.

Uh you can see that at the toilet um to the edge of the sink for clearance.

So we we have plenty of room.

We provided that.

We have plenty of uh space to enter the shower.

We only need I think it was 52 inches.

We provided um four feet, uh and that that shower is uh handicapped, totally handicapped.

Back up.

You needed 52 inches and you provided 48.

No, four feet.

Four feet is usually 48 inches.

48.

You're right.

You're right.

Okay.

So whatever it was we provided the what was, and there's a diagram.

Let's do we have that diagram at the top.

Pull down a little bit here.

Okay.

Okay, so there's a diagram.

Okay, this is right in there.

It says type B unit.

Okay.

So we provided the 48.

We provided 48 in the shower.

Okay.

So now the shower itself is 48 by 36.

So we went uh above what the requirements were for that.

The approach is 48, and we've got the 30 inches in front.

We've got more than 30 inches.

We probably got five feet in front of it to uh easily maneuver into it, even in a wheelchair, okay.

If I could just jump in real quick, as I understand it from our meeting with the building department, if you have a type B dwelling, there are two bathroom uh scenarios that you could have, right?

And two two different layouts.

So we changed this bathroom to comply with one of the layouts so that the building department would be satisfied it's a type B bathroom.

Right.

Okay.

Yep.

Just I'm sorry to stop you.

Um board uh do you want Mr.

Fischelle to go through each of the changes or do we want to just leave it for staff?

I I think we can just leave it for staff.

I think it's pretty good requirements or not.

Yeah, okay.

Sure, of course.

Okay, good.

So let's um move on.

Uh well, I think those were the issues that were uh remaining from our last hearing.

Yeah, there were a couple of others that uh the washer dryer side by side, um, because the stackable is um unwilling.

Who is speaking?

I'm speaking Len.

Oh Mr.

Fishelle.

Mr.

Fishell.

Yeah, no, we understand there's some other changes, but we'll leave them to staff to review.

Hopefully, you've given staff a list of what you've done so that they can see easily um what to look for.

Okay.

Do they have that yet?

There wasn't we have a detail of what the exact changes were.

The answer to that is no.

Okay, why don't you give that send that over to staff uh after the meeting, please?

Sure.

And we will also consult with the with the building department.

Yeah, okay.

Um does anyone from the board have any other items that uh to discuss with the applicant?

No, Mr.

Chairman, I don't nothing for me.

Okay.

Uh Tony Capalbo, anything else you wanted to go over with us before we go to the public?

No, sir.

Okay.

Um let's go to the public then.

If there's anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this application, either for or against it, um, please raise your hand.

Could we can we take this um plan down?

Thanks, Joe.

Okay.

Do we have anyone from the public who wants to speak on this?

I do not see any raised hands.

Okay.

Then we have the um what I'm showing is still that we still need to get is uh the answers to uh representative weinberg's questions.

That's a uh step issue.

Um just confirmation from TTP that the um what is it the existing conditions of 800 and 900 would not require a new um traffic report and um the 3Ds of the groups of houses.

Um I'm what I'm good with closing this.

Um just letting these things get delivered um after the closing if um if people are good with that.

Works for me.

Yeah, I won't have any questions about it.

But you have to go back to the applicant.

Okay.

Uh Jerry.

I'm fine with it also, Mr.

Chairman.

Okay, good.

Then um application two two five.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Uh Attorney Capalbo, anything else you'd like to say?

No, sir.

Okay, good.

Then application 225-27 um is now closed.

Um next we have application 225-1-2 Woodway Pines.

Mr.

Chairman, Mr.

Chair, can I can I make a quick suggestion?

Absolutely.

Yeah, I would could you announce uh once again that the uh two applications which have been uh yeah only gonna be oh no.

So people want to sit in there waiting.

Good idea.

Okay, for anyone who's here to hear um the two applications for the projects on Long Ridge Road.

Uh that's applications 225-28 and 225-29.

Um one is the conversion of the office building to apartments and the other is the townhouses.

Um those two applications have been continued until our next meeting on um November 10th at 630 p.m.

Uh on Teams.

But thank you, Bill.

Um next is application 225-15 Woodway Pines, LLC 9 and 15 Woodway Road and 0.

1321 and 1325 Pope Street, site and architectural plans and a requested uses and special permit.

Applicant is seeking to consolidate all five parcels into one and construct 20 townhouse style units located in three separate buildings.

Um so um this is the other one where there was a document dump on the board this afternoon.

Um why don't we uh start going through what's uh the items that we had requested and um please show us uh if there is if you've had a chance yet to comply with those.

Um the landscape plan.

Um we wanted there was a request to show the trees that are being saved.

Do we have that?

Yes, we do.

You want to bring that up?

Sure.

Can I share my screen again?

Sorry, why don't just introduce yourself for the record again if you would.

Sure.

Again, my name is Joseph Capalbo.

I'm an attorney practicing law here in Stanford.

I'm here tonight uh representing Woodway Pines LLC and also with me tonight are Lindy Andrea, who's the engineer and surveyor on this.

Who can answer all your questions regarding the landscaping plan and what's being done with respect to that?

Um and um did I share my screen already?

Do you see it?

Not yet.

Oh yeah.

Okay.

Oh no.

We see it.

You can gotta make a little larger though, please.

Okay, let me go to the color because that's yeah.

It's a little bit better.

And uh Matt Pop, I believe is on somewhere.

Um so there were there were a number of issues, right?

They regarding the sidewalk, the trees that are being saved, the new trees that are added, fence types, swapping of non-native with native plants and aberriting screening along the gas station, I think were all of the issues with respect to that.

And I think he's addressed all of them uh on this particular plan.

Um so if Matt's there if he wants to hop in, we'd love to hear from him.

I don't see him on the list.

I saw him before.

Mr.

Pop, if you're there, could you please raise your hand?

Oh, there he is.

There he is.

He's on mute.

There he goes.

There we are.

Uh good evening, uh Matthew Pop Landscape Architect Environmental Land Solutions.

And I'll just go through the uh changes.

Um starting off at the uh gas station area, which is in the the top uh right.

Uh there is a request for a uh a six-foot vinyl fence along the property line, so that kind of screens uh the gas station building.

And then we put we can we just make it a little larger, please.

Uh Joe.

Sure.

For whichever section we're talking about.

Yeah.

So does it.

Yes.

Yep.

So and then we wrap that corner.

The fence.

Do we show it all the way around?

Uh we do.

Yeah, it goes, it goes the slide down.

It basically goes from uh yeah, the the entry drive and makes the 90-degree turn towards Hope Street, and then goes and attaches to the uh kind of the new retaining wall.

Um and then we wrap that corner with the arborvides, and then I shifted some of the American holly down to kind of screen uh that building.

Uh so when you come in, you don't see the the gas station.

And where are the arborvities?

They're uh soon as they're the uh 31 to right there, those right there.

And it before we had some shrubs, uh low shrubs uh by the bike rack, so those are now removed, so we have a little strip of lawn by the bike rack to get through.

Um and then we have the arborvite uh bordering the property line.

Um then the ones on the on the east side of the gas station, yes, east and south of the building.

So that's that and then we uh changed the magnolia, uh, which is not native to a native uh tree, which is a uh sour wood, which is kind of a similar size, smaller uh size trees.

Uh there's two of those, so we switched those out.

You want to show us that, please on the uh plant list.

Um yeah, the plant I'll be also added one.

Um so if you go down, um if you can zoom in, ex oxodendrum, which is right um maybe about the fifth, sixth or seventh one down uh uh right there, sorrowwood.

Yeah, so that's what that's replaced.

What?

The magnolia.

We had two magnolias, and I made some other changes, slight changes.

Um so I added an additional one, which is along the hopes tree um streetscape.

But it doesn't count as a street tree, though.

It's too a little bit too far far away from that.

Um again, it's a smaller narrow growing uh native tree.

So um then if you so how many street trees are there?

Um right right above you.

We have the list uh right there.

Uh there is maybe zoom a little bit.

We've got I think there's 12 on uh Hope Street and four on uh Woodway Road.

Yes.

And those are small or medium?

There are uh there's some utility lines overhead.

Um so they're you know on the medium to small and medium size trees that we're proposing, unfortunately.

But um and then if we zoom out a little bit.

Right, that's that's good, maybe zoom in right along that uh eastern property line.

You hear?

Yep, yep.

So can we zoom in?

So we have the the three uh trees together in the bottom left.

Oops.

Yep, those three trees right there.

One, two, three.

That's where one of the uh non-native magnolia is.

So I switched it to three birch trees again, just to provide additional screening from the neighbor.

Um, and I changed the uh the type of uh uh had uh just a regular arbor body change it to green giants.

I think they're a little bit fuller.

Uh and then right at behind the houses, uh the shrubs that are between the patios.

Uh I had a viburnum that grows maybe maybe seven feet, seven by seven.

Um so I switched uh to a holly that grows, you know, maybe like 14 to 16 feet in height that's still narrow just to provide additional screening from the neighbors.

Uh that row of arborvitae that are just right be uh right there, those and an additional, we squeezing an additional arborvity there.

Um and then if we go to the southern property line.

I'm sorry, you were just on the eastern property line there?

Yes, yep.

Okay.

Did it it looks like be at the bottom?

Yeah.

The what about the rest of the property line?

It looks like it much of it is not screened.

So we have a retaining wall there.

It's here.

This area you're referring to this area?

Uh-huh.

Yes.

So the retaining wall there, and then just to provide access through uh behind the patios.

Um, you know, that didn't the screening there would be tough to have.

Um, you have it on the right.

Yeah, the wall, there's no wall there.

The wall ends.

Hmm.

We were able to provide uh alternatives for that, which I'll we'll explain in a little bit.

Okay, and this has been signed off on by the neighbors.

Uh well, I don't know that anything has been signed off by the neighbors.

I have spoken to one of the neighbors and I have communicated with one of the neighbors, right?

Um, and what we've done is, and and when Mr.

Dandria comes on, we'll explain a little more.

We were able to save about six trees, uh mature trees along this area, right?

They're not shown on this uh particular landscape plan, but they are shown on the uh zoning location survey.

And we're able to save them with with wells.

So that was one of the things that the neighbors were concerned about.

We were able to save six of them.

And what we were also going to do was with respect to this area right here.

We and depending upon what the board would prefer, um, there's a there's a large bathroom window on each one of these units, and we can do one of two things.

We could make it a transom window so that it sits high in the bathroom, can't be seen in or out, but does provide light, or we could leave the windows as they are and provide frosted windows.

Um and if the board has a preference, we would do either one, but um that's what we would do to provide uh some uh privacy uh for the neighbors, especially in this area right here where we just can't provide any more screening.

Board, do we have a preference?

Frosted versus transom.

I think I'd vote, I'd say transom.

Yeah.

But the I guess for transome.

Yeah, it's fine with me.

And the neighbors wouldn't be able to see in.

That's correct.

And and the and the homeowners here wouldn't be able to see out a transit window is a long rectangular window that sits high on the wall.

Yeah.

So it provides light, but it doesn't provide sight lines.

I think that was a big concern from last meeting.

Yeah.

Okay.

So um we just need that um revised in the plan.

Right.

And then lastly, lastly just along the southern property line where they kind of got the bluish uh evergreens.

I just added another uh holly in the back there.

I squeezed another one in there just to get some additional screening.

Oh, no.

That was it on the the changes to the landscape plan.

Okay.

Um was there any board anything else on the landscaping?

No, I think it's a pretty generous landscaping plan now.

Yeah.

Is the is the um project above or below the homeowners.

Which way is the ground sloping?

We would you say the homeowners, you mean the neighboring properties?

Yeah.

Right?

Behind I guess it's a condo.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I I'd let Lindy Andrew answer that question.

Yeah.

And uh I am on uh Lindy Andrea, uh Connecticut professional engineer.

We provide the land surveying engineering services.

On the um east side, the property starts to drop off and it drops off more to the southeast corner.

And so what we're doing right where the cursor's going there in the playground area, that's the retaining wall that lifts it up and that levels us out.

So our units at the end of the day, the higher windows might be slightly higher, and the first floors will be a little higher.

Um, but in this corner where we're looking right now, that's been set up so that we can get uh you know quite a bit of screening there.

So we're a little bit higher than the uh the property to the east.

And since I'm speaking right now, what we're trying to do here, which will go back and forth perhaps with Matt Pop, we identified one, two, three, four, five existing trees starting from the southeast corner where we think we can well around them if uh Mr.

Pop agrees and keep those high canopies of some of those existing trees.

Okay.

And that's you said we'll see that in the um whatever it is the site.

We have them on our site grading plan now as a most recent revision.

Okay.

There you go.

Thank you, Joe.

There it is.

And if uh make it a little larger, Joe, please.

Sure.

Yep.

There you go.

So again, we're trying to lift this up here.

It helps us with a number of different things, especially for accessibility.

And all those little indents there, those are located right around where those trees are.

Um, so if Mr.

Pop agrees, we can include those and maybe a tree or two that he's proposing or Bush might drop out in exchange for the higher canopy that's existing there today.

Yeah, the other thing too, while you have this this uh picture, Joe, if you could point out that vinyl existing vinyl fence, which is east of the easterly property line.

East of the east, you mean this down here?

Uh yeah, you'll see where it says vinyl fence, right?

And that goes the entire length of the east side.

And it's a six-foot-high solid vinyl fence.

Uh that's owned by the neighbors.

There you go.

Perfect.

Now there you'll see a tree in the background, and that's one I'm sure that we're gonna try to well around and and save that uh as part of the the uh development.

Um I'm still okay.

It's since we're talking about a fence there, the retaining wall that's um slightly north of that that you were pointing out before.

The retain, yeah.

Can you um here?

Yeah.

So does that go above the ground level, or is it just at the ground level?

Well, no, in this case here, what we're trying to do in that southeast corner is that's where again uh Joe, if you can go to the southeast corner.

No, in the middle there.

No, no.

Go ahead and look right in that location there, right in the middle.

Okay.

Well, yeah, along there.

That's it.

Oh, okay.

So you said it's a retaining wall.

Is the ground even with the top of the wall?

Oh, I see it.

Right where Joe's cursor is right now, that's it it it slopes off.

So in order to get these patios to so we have the passive recreational area of the patios, we step back and we um create the walls.

I think they're usually, let's see, maybe two and a half feet high, like in this um corner before that where it jogs east, you'll see the difference there in the wall.

It's just it's just a matter of trying to level it out so you can walk behind the patios for landscaping and you know, um really accessibility.

In terms of those screening, can't you if you can't put trees there?

How about putting some fencing on top of the wall?

Well, that's a good question.

Um and then previous years, a few years back, the zoning enforcement officer would say in a site plan approval like this, if they approved a fence on top of a wall of a certain height, that was okay with the zoning enforcement officer.

The reason we haven't proposed it is there's also something in the regulations that said a combined height of a wall and fence as measured from the low side, in this case the easterly site, shall not exceed six feet when in the side yard.

So there you go.

I mean, that's why we didn't do any more fencing on top.

We could do a combination of both, but it would still be limited to six feet.

So it get you know, you'd have a fence on top of the existing wall.

Sorry, the proposed wall that we're showing now that might only be uh picket high, two and a half feet, three feet high.

I I would think we can do that, but also remember that there is a vinyl fence right behind it.

So it's kind of like the vinyl fence then would be slightly lower than if we can bind a picket style fence on top of the proposed retaining wall.

That's where the vinyl fence is now.

Yes, there's an existing vinyl fence that goes the entire length of our neighbor's property from Woodway down to that southeast corner of ours.

Okay, then I don't I don't unless the board thinks that there should be a fence on top of the wall.

It seems like there's already a fence there.

Right.

Okay.

Okay.

Good.

Keep going, please.

Um if uh it shall going to continue or keep going around, or do you want me to jump to the sidewalks?

Um, well, Matt, is there anything else on the landscaping?

He's muted.

Matt, you're muted.

Uh you're unmuted, but we can't hear you.

It's not even eight o'clock at one already.

Matt.

I don't know where he went.

Okay.

We need to hear from Matt, but in the meantime, um, why don't you keep okay?

Okay, well, keeping this uh picture on on display right now, going to Hope Street.

Um, there's a very nice row of trees that are being proposed, but and we have the full width of the required 10 feet.

But in this case, you'll see we have the the amenity strip split, and that's because we have heavy buried electric lines that run just behind the curb line.

So then it didn't make any sense to push the sidewalk sidewalk east, you know, up against our street property line and plant over the lines.

But we also would like a snow strip.

So in this case, we split the amenity strip and we have uh call it a snow strip, if you will, right next to curb, the required five foot sidewalk, and then that leaves us a pretty good amount of space to do the tree planting that Matt's done.

So that's why we've split that amenity space on this side.

Um you should be able to speak.

Uh before we get there, Ralph, are you are you okay with that?

Yes.

Okay, no issue with our ranks.

No.

Okay.

Board, any concern about splitting the amenity strip?

No.

Sounds like the reasonable thing to do.

It's fine.

Okay.

So we have our 10 foot there.

Yep.

How about on Woodway?

Sure.

Okay.

And Woodway, it works out just fine.

So we have our sidewalk um curbing, five-foot walk, and then the remaining amenity strip is for the tree planning.

And how many street trees are on Woodway?

Four.

Yeah, we count the two, and then there's two slightly in within 10 feet of the property line.

Okay, that was that was a question we had, I think.

Still had.

Um, and those are within 10 feet.

Within 10 feet.

Okay.

Um sidewalk for the uh gas station.

Is that what's shown there?

Yes.

So we uh I spoke with uh Luke.

I uh my personal opinion is I don't think anything needs to be done.

It's a relatively new sidewalk.

He doesn't necessarily agree with me, but he is willing to accept a fee and lie uh instead of us um having to try to uh you know re um rebuild the sidewalk, especially in light of the fact that it's not owned by us.

And um, and there's a business that's operating there where there's constantly cars going in and out.

So um I think it, you know, if the board was would be so inclined in lieu of the re the condition in the uh report from TPP if we could um um substitute a fee and lie, um if that should work better, then I I think we would be amenable to that.

Uh board I I don't have an issue with that as long as TTP's on board with that system that works for me.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay.

If she's okay with it.

Okay.

Um Ralph, do we have anything in writing from TTP?

I don't know if you have anything in writing from TTP.

I I believe I do.

Um I have a series of emails uh with Luke.

Um we we will need these for the record.

So um well, I'll submit the entire PowerPoint for the record and you can have it all.

But here's my original uh email to Luke explaining that um I don't think the sidewalk needs to be replaced.

However, if you don't agree with me, we would you consider the fee and lie?

What are your thoughts?

And he said, I'm not opposed to a check for the work along the gas station frontage.

Do you want your engineer to develop cost estimate?

So we were able to give him an estimate at this point, um, which is not that one.

I mean it's we need the calculation.

Right.

So the calculation is 250 dollars a foot.

Um plus CPI, yeah.

And uh so we calculate that it's going to be approximately 50,000, and Luke was fine with that.

He his response is sounds good and sounds about right.

How many feet did your engineer measure it out to be?

I'd have to ask Mr.

D'Andrea to answer that.

Mr.

D'Andrea.

Okay.

Uh I have to work backwards here.

50.

Well, that's not the way it works.

No, no, I'll I'll tell you how it works.

Um bear with me one second here.

If I but okay, it's about 200 feet.

And and the 250 a foot is spelled out in the zoning rates.

So we measure uh the center line of the walk, got that distance time 250, it brings you up to the price.

Okay.

What we'll need to know is the frontage on each street.

Sure.

And if you could forward that um communication with uh Luke.

Sure.

Um Len, are you why don't you send that to Ralph as well?

We'll do.

The the footage.

Staff will need to uh just verify the uh the calculation.

Okay.

What's what's next the uh let's see explanation regarding existing homes not being market rate affordable, uh with some evidence.

Yeah, so we submitted a letter with respect to that.

Um and I'll paraphrase the letter.

It we at the time my client purchased the property, which was January of 2024, um there were no tenants in possession, there were no leases.

His understanding, and to the best of his knowledge and belief was there was may have been one tenant in one of the dwellings.

I forget which one it was, but it's the white dwelling.

It's the only one that's really habitable within the prior three years.

Um but other than that, um, there doesn't appear to be there were other there may have been other tenants there when I say other tenants for other purposes, um parking of vehicles or storage or whatever it may have been, but as far as um you know living in the dwellings, um if I showed you pictures of the dwellings, you would understand that uh no.

That's not the point.

That's that's why it's market rate affordable.

That's correct.

So what about the one?

I don't well, we don't know what the rent was.

I don't have any reason to believe that there was any any uh below market rate deal that was provided at that time, not in that neighborhood.

But I don't have that, I don't have that evidence yet, if that's what you're asking.

Joe, market rate affordable means that the rent is the what one would pay for a dwelling unit in that condition.

It's it's not below the market rate for a similar uh house.

It's just the mark, it's just whatever the market rate is, whatever they're paying for that house.

Well, I I think that according to the regulations, market rate affordable as defined in the regulations is housing for which the sales price, the rent, or the rent increase is not regulated or limited by covenant deed restriction or other legal instrument or such restriction is for less than 30 years by but which is or was at some point during the last three years affordable to households earning no more than 80 percent of the AMI.

Okay.

Do you and the answer is um what do you what can you show us on that at this point I can only show you what to the best of my client's knowledge and belief is who has only owned it for a year and three quarters, not the full three years.

Okay.

Um so the issue is whether in the three years prior to what is it the application, Ralph?

Sorry, what was that?

There's a three-year look back from the date of the application for market rate affordable.

Yeah.

Um I mean the the issue obviously is um when properties were were ownership properties, um, that you don't really know what market rate affordable means.

So it would be for the rental units umly that were there before.

Were there rental units there before?

We believe there was one.

The letter that came today said there was one house and that the owner said it was market rate.

Correct.

That's to his best belief and knowledge.

We haven't been able to verify it, but yes, that's correct.

It was market rate affordable.

No, it was market rate.

Market rate.

Hmm.

How does what is he base that on?

I I don't know.

I can't answer that question.

Like I said, I think the appropriate thing to do is if you close the hearing or whatever you decide to do tonight, I think I need to find the prior owner and provide an affidavit to the effect that would satisfy you one way or the other.

I think that's the only way to um properly address this, if I can find the prior one.

And it's just one house.

That's correct.

Yeah.

So that would be if it turned out it was market rate affordable, it would be one additional BMR unit.

I don't think so.

I think it would be less than that.

Because I think for every one and a half market rate affordable units, you have to provide one BMR unit.

So if it were one, it would be something less than like two thirds.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um folks okay with getting an affidavit.

Yes, sir.

Yep.

Okay.

Um what's next?

Um I think the um according to my list, I think we've got everything covered except confirmation of whether the BMR units will be rental or ownership.

And at this time, um he plans on them being rental.

Okay.

Um we did get the affordability plan.

Um, but you left out the affordability level, um, which I think needs to be in there.

Uh well, I think the whole plan would need to be updated, you know.

No, no, no.

We're it's but we're approving it at a particular affordability level.

So it it needs to have the affordability level in it.

Okay.

Um in section seven.

So can you update?

Yes, I can now question.

Um it says in the affordability plan that Woodway Pines would administer the affordable units.

Is that correct?

Um at the time that I wrote it, that was correct.

I I haven't confirmed that with my client lately.

I mean, that was written some time ago.

So I think that's probably um still correct.

Um he owns units and he would administer it himself.

Um were you you say in there that he has experience in administering affordable units?

That's correct.

Uh no, I I would say he has experience in rental units and as far as administrating affordable units goes, he would work with the city with respect to that.

It's not a difficult task.

Okay, that's not what you said though, in the in the document.

Can you take a look at it and at least have it say whatever you think is correct?

Sure.

Because what I'm I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but there are small landlords who really um this is a pain in the ass for them and they're not very good at it.

And so what we've suggested in the past is that they turn it over to someone else, like a um charter of communities and let them do it.

So um if if what you've got in there now is right that he has experience administering affordable units, that's great.

But if he doesn't, then um really he should consider um letting someone else do it because it'll it'll it takes up a lot of this time of the people at the city when they're working with an owner who um had does not have experience in this.

Yeah, I understand, but with all due respect, that should be his option, and he should be allowed to um to manage it himself if that's his choice.

No, I think it's I think the board has a say in that.

Um, but he does need to have experience in this.

So um I think that needs to get cleared up.

Sure.

Okay, what else do we have?

I think that was all of your uh open issues from last time.

I know the public may have some comments.

Okay.

Um board, are there any other questions on this project?

No, I'd like to hear the public.

Yeah, nothing from me.

Okay.

There's anyone from the public who wants to speak on this, uh, please raise your hand.

When you call down, give us your name and address, please.

Uh we have one speaker who raised his hand.

Shows up as Kevin and colleagues.

You should be able to unmute and speak.

Yes.

Hello, how are you?

Are you Kevin or the colleagues?

No, I am not Kevin.

Um, I am Kevin's wife, Marisol Gonzalez.

He's asked me to speak on his behalf if that is okay.

Um, we are the owners of the gas station.

So we were told by our lovely neighbors that this is something that has been talked about, and we're very happy to hear that.

Um, but we have a lot of incredible concerns, and no one has contacted us about how this will impact our business.

We just came in here.

Um we just brought our business and saved everything.

We're American citizens.

We have been working so hard, and now we are learning of this.

Um we're quite devastated because the traffic here is already terrible.

We already have issues where we've had to close a half an hour early because the second commuter traffic starts, the horns and the gas and the soot, everything is so loud, it's too hard for us that we we just stop it because there's too much.

So now we're learning more of this, and it's just going to be more concrete, more noise, more dust.

How is that going to impact our business?

It took us eight years to save up for this.

And now we're losing it.

We're devastated.

Um, thank you for making the concession on the sidewalk.

But what is it going to take?

Two years to build this, and we have nowhere else to go.

We will we will not make money.

People will not come.

Why won't they come?

Because of the noise, the construction, the traffic.

We already have issues with backup.

Everyone's always beeping, beeping.

That three-way stop is a nightmare.

And when I heard that you were going to put in these units here, I thought, where are you going to put the cars?

Because it's so loud.

I I mean, once it hits 5 p.m., I I try to not let people come because it's just too much with the cars and the trucks.

Everybody coming down Hope Street and then everyone going to Merritt.

This is terrible.

Um did you do the traffic study, if you don't mind my asking?

Did you have someone come in at 5 p.m.?

Or did you do it at 2 p.m.

on a Saturday?

You don't know what it's like listening to the beeping.

My poor neighbors, I have very sweet old neighbors who love us and love our kids.

Um and they just I worry about them and the noise.

It's just it's it's very hot.

It's of course you want to see Stanford have everything it needs, but um, we're worried about this location.

We're worried about the noise, the excess traffic, and potential accidents if I'm honest.

Pollution, of course.

Okay.

Um thank you.

Do we have anyone else from the public movie?

Uh yes, we have Miss Pace, or excuse me, Miss Bell.

You sure it's not Miss Pace.

No shows up as Bell.

Ah, okay.

Hi, this is Susan Bell, and I live on Hope Street, and the traffic at Woodway and um Hope is absolutely horrendous.

Was there a traffic study done?

And I want to know.

I agree with the previous caller.

We have kids walking down the street because of the elementary school.

You have people driving every which way, it's very noisy, and I understand only one neighbor was contacted.

There's several neighbors that are very happy.

Apparently, they weren't contacted.

But a traffic study needs to be done in the morning between seven and nine weekdays, and uh 4 30 to 6 30 weekdays.

Where's the traffic study?

This is a terrible corner.

You've got kids going walking to school.

This is really outrageous, and something needs to be done.

This is way too big for that space.

Way too many units.

It really needs to be condensed.

This particular property wasn't made for this, but again, where's the traffic study?

And I only understand one neighbor was taught to.

So I find that outrageous as well.

Hope streets got a lot of traffic lately with these all these apartments approved.

When my husband and I moved here 36 years ago, we could get to the grade A on Hope Street in 10 or 15 minutes.

Now it takes 40 minutes.

And this is gonna be a nightmare with all the cars, and I'm worried about safety for the kids walking to school.

There's many that do.

Where's the traffic study?

And why weren't neighbors contacted?

I own I understand one neighbor was contacted.

That's outrageous.

That's all I have to say.

Okay, thank you.

Uh next we have Miss Kligler.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Oh, hi, thank you.

I'm Kathy Kligler.

I live um on Prior Tuck, and I do live in the neighborhood.

Um, I do like the idea of townhouses, but you're replacing two houses with I'm not sure how many units, but it really looks like an overload.

I'm concerned as we go forward in this city that, you know, we are concerned about the environment and keeping things as green as possible.

This is too many apartments on too small a uh size of land.

And it it just is everything we shouldn't be doing in Stamford.

Okay, we just are throwing our environment in the garbage.

And you know, with every building that we build that's too big for its space, we are hurting our community.

Okay, thank you so much.

Oh, and by the way, the neighbors need to be contacted.

That's really a concern.

Thank you so much.

Bye-bye.

Thank you, Kathy.

Um, I have no other speakers raising their hands.

Okay.

Then um, you want to uh respond to the uh speakers questions and comments, please?

So as as it relates to Mrs.

Gonzalez, there's going to be construction and it will be temporary.

And I'm sure there may be a disruption and noise as a result of it.

But uh ultimately, ultimately in the long run, I think they have a uh a convenience store there.

I think ultimately in the long run, I think she'll be happy because it'll probably help her business when that's all done.

Um, Mrs.

Bell, um, there was a um as the board knows a traffic study done, it was in April of this year when they do traffic studies, they take into consideration all issues, all hours and all days.

Um there are kids, and one of the benefits of some of the changes you made to the zoning regulations are when you uh provide a project like this, you have to uh upgrade the sidewalks and make them safer.

And I think in the long run, again, the kids will be safer as a result of this.

Um the um and and finally, Mrs.

Click Kligler, I think I hope I'm saying that correctly.

Um you know, as far as this being overload, this is exactly what this zone was intended to provide, right?

So this is the arm one zone.

There's no channel zone change here.

Uh there's no master plan change.

Uh this was designed and uh planned for this type of use at this location, and it's exactly um, you know, what this application, what this applicant is doing.

Um I did have one other comment I wanted to make, but I can't think of it off the top of my head now.

I lost my train of thought.

So if I think of it, I'll let you know.

But maybe it's about the mailing, yeah.

All of um everybody uh we sent out uh probably I think it was, and I could be off a little bit, 157 notices in connection with this application because there are, as you know, condominiums all around this particular area.

In fact, if we go to the aerial map, everybody who owns property within 100 feet and gets notice.

And so here's the property, and all of these people receive notice.

Now, at the last hearing, there were uh three or four people who called, one of them, I think they were all out of one particular room and they expressed what their concerns were, and I think we've addressed those concerns.

There was one individual, Mr.

Malloy, who did contact me after that hearing.

I did uh contact him back.

I tried to keep him informed as to the things that we were trying to do to address their issues.

Um, and I think we have been able to do that, right?

We've been able to put in these wells to save the mature trees that they were talking about that day.

Um we are going to uh provide a transom window so that it provides them with the privacy they were hoping for.

Um and you know, where we can, we are providing them with a little more screening.

So um for all those reasons, I think we did address what their concerns were.

And had anybody else contacted me, I certainly would have responded to them as well.

How do you contact how do you how do you contact him?

I don't know.

I'm sorry.

I don't we send notices, they contact me and then I'll respond.

I don't know, otherwise I wouldn't know who to contact.

So I was saying I have a lot of elderly neighbors.

I am with one of them.

Is it okay if she talks as well?

Or is it just um because we're on the same Zoom?

We are only allowed one question.

No, you can you can have someone else.

Barbara, would you like to speak?

I'd like to speak.

I'm Barbara Rosenberg, I'm in unit 10 uh in Woodway Common.

Uh the concern, the concern that I have is that I don't know how many feet this is going to be right out from our back door.

There is a fence there now that is an eight, maybe an eight-foot fence.

Uh, I can say you're planning to put up trees behind that fence, but how many people do you think are going to be living in these particular units that are going to be two to three bedrooms?

Well, I think the more important question is what is the car allotment?

Are you giving two parking spaces?

Sorry, can we can we have one speaker at a time, please?

Yes, what would the car allotment be for these units?

Okay.

Two parking spaces per unit.

When when we're done, please when ask your questions when we're when we have finished with the public, uh the applicant's attorney will answer everyone's questions, but we're not going to have a back and forth going on.

I don't understand why not.

Because this is all the meeting is run.

I'm sorry.

This is how the meeting is run.

Thank you.

Um, do we have anyone else uh from the public?

Okay.

Um Joe, I think you may have gotten one more question there.

Yeah, sure.

So this particular uh proposal meets or exceeds all the parking requirements for this type of development.

Um, and each unit has uh dedicated two spaces, plus there's additional spaces uh for um visitors.

Okay.

Good.

Thank you.

Um that looks like all of the members of the public who've raised their hands.

Ralph, do you see anyone else?

I don't see anyone else.

Okay.

Uh board, any final questions for um the applicant?

Um, the only last question I have is did HPAC ever get back to us with Vanita asking that question?

Yes.

So um HPAC did get back to Venita and uh they told her that there was no historical significance to any of the buildings there.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Well that's in one of our emails from last week.

Yeah, I didn't see it.

Yeah, thank you.

I didn't.

One of the bazillions of emails.

Good.

Okay.

Then um, so board uh any reason we should not close this.

I don't see any reason not to.

No, no more participation, no.

Okay.

Uhtorney Capelvo, anything else you'd like to say before we close?

Uh no, Mr.

Chairman.

Okay.

Then uh application 225-15 is closed.

Um, we are now going on to um two new applications, um, which um I think we should hear together um since they both deal with the same property.

Uh the first is application 224-18, Continental Family Holdings, LLC by Michael Cacase, Kira Kase, Tush and Santagata, 1111 Summer Street map change.

Applicants proposing to rezone 23 Barrie Place from the current MG manufacturing general to the proposed RM1, multiple family district, low density design district.

Um RMF, multifamily residence design district zoning districts.

Uh the second application is application 225-2-3, Continental Family Holdings, 23 Berry Place, site and architectural plans and a requested uses and special permit.

Applicant is proposing to construct 60 townhouses and a 201 unit apartment building with a total of 474 parking spaces and associated amenities.

For um those two applications.

Certainly.

Um May 24th, 2024 to Mr.

David Stein, Chair City of Stanford Zoning Board regarding ZB application number 224-18.

Uh Michael Cake, Cake's Tush in San Agata representing Continental Family Holdings LLC.

Dear Mr.

Stein and members of the zoning board during its regularly scheduled meeting held on Tuesday, May 21st, 2024.

Applicant is proposing to rezone 23 Barrie Place from the current MG Manufacturing General to the proposed RM1 multiple family district, low density design district and RMF, multifamily residence design district zoning districts.

Michael Cake representing the applicant made a presentation and answered questions from the board.

After some discussion, the planning board unanimously voted to recommend approval of ZB application 224-18 and found this to be in general harmony with the master plan category number three, residential low density multifamily, and master plan category number five, residential high density multifamily, and is aligned with the following master plan policies and strategies.

Master Plan Policy 6A to maintain residential neighborhood character by balancing new development with preservation of existing residential communities through gray field redevelopment, supporting neighborhood revitalization by activating a long vacant site.

Master Plan Policy 6C to encourage development of mixed income housing by encouraging conversion of vacant office buildings to residential use.

Housing plan and master plan goals to provide a range of housing options for Stanford's workforce.

Sincerely Stanford Planning Board, Teresa Dell Chair.

Thank you.

And the second both.

Don't you want this?

Do you want the second one?

Yes.

Did you read them both then?

Yeah, let's read them both.

Um August 28, 2025, to Mr.

David Stein, Chair, City of Stanford Zoning Board regarding ZD application number 225-23, Continental Family Holdings LLC.

Dear Mr.

Stein and members of the zoning board, during its regularly scheduled meeting held on Tuesday, August 26, 2025, the planning board reviewed the above captioned application referred in accordance with the requirements of the Stanford Charter.

Applicant is proposing to construct 60 townhomes and a 201 unit apartment building for the total of 474 parking spaces and associated amenities.

Michael Cacase, Cake's Tush, and Sanagata, along with his team, made a presentation and answered questions from the board.

After some discussion, the planning board unanimously voted to recommend approval of ZB application number 225-23 and found this to be in general harmony with master plan category number three, residential low density multifamily, and master plan category number five, residential high density multifamily.

Sincerely, Stanford Planning Board, Jennifer Goodzino, Chair.

Good.

Thank you.

Ralph, did we receive the certificates of mailing for both of these applications?

Yes, we did.

And did we receive the sign affidavits for both applications?

Yes, we did.

Good.

Okay.

Um we have uh attorney cake with us.

Yes, he should be able to unmute.

Good evening, Mr.

Chairman, members of the board.

My name is Michael Cacase.

I'm an attorney with a firm of Cacay-Tush and San Agata.

And this evening, we represent the applicants with regard to all three applications before you, Continental Family Holdings, LLC.

With me this evening are members of our team, uh, including Derek Dunez of Rocco V D'Andrea and Sons, together with Lindy Andrea, our engineers and surveyors.

Ravi Ahuya, uh, who is our architect, as well as representatives from SLR, our traffic engineers, and Matt Pop, who is our landscape architect, as well as other members of our development team.

We are, am I able to share my uh screen at this point?

Yes, you should be able to share.

Yes.

Okay, it's just not showing up on my screen, but um we're excited this evening to present this application because it takes a unique industrial site uh and transforms it into a handsome residential development.

We've listened and reviewed your comments on a number of other applications, particularly on Long Ridge Road, which sought to replace non-residential uses with residential use and heeded your advice.

We submitted at the outset simultaneous applications in 2024 to change both the master plan map and the zoning map.

And that way each board would know what the other is doing.

We have included a mix of both townhouses and larger buildings with apartment style housing to create a buffer to the residential neighbors with the more intense development away from those neighbors and virtually hidden from sight.

More importantly, if the markets allow, all of the townhouses are expected to be put up for sale and the apartments would be rental.

I'd also note that all the BMRs that are required under the zoning regulation are on-site BMRs, and we are not seeking any reduction in parking or bonuses, for example, on the larger larger apartment building.

There's some 200 units of housing, 20 of which will be affordable or BMR units.

And under your rigs, we could have requested an additional bonus for 40 more units, but the uh the project owners and the team have decided not to seek that bonus.

And in almost every case, this application meets your zoning requirements in terms of height, area, bulk, setbacks, green space, uh, and all the other uh requirements.

I think it's important to take a look at the site, as most of us who make presentations to your board.

Um we'd we like to orient you to the site, which is shown here in the yellow outline.

And what's important about this is that the entire northerly border is up against the Metro North train tracks, and even north of that are other industrial or commercial uses.

So the entire northerly border uh is up against non-residential uses.

Likewise, the entire westerly border is up against the Innes Arden golf course, as is the entire southerly border is up against the Innes Arden golf course.

The balance of the property abuts other uh commercial or industrial uses to the north here, and its easterly border is mainly up against uh St.

Clemens Church and abuts a few smaller residential units in that area.

The in most of the east side of the border is industrially zoned or used that way, and I'm happy to report that I'm authorized after discussions with attorney David Laznick, who represented Innes Arden in connection with this application, that I'm authorized to say that they have no objection to this proposal.

Moreover, the pastor of St.

Clement's Church has submitted a letter uh supporting the application that's before you.

The waterside area is a mix of many different uses, including offices, industrial uses, it includes a DWD zone, the RM1 zone, it includes RMF zones, uh together with MG R6 and CWD.

This site was originally zoned for general industrial uses.

It was originally 11.77 acres, but it was subdivided within the last several years so that it the area that is the subject of this application is smaller than that because a part of the property was spun off, and you all approved a skating rink facility, which was built on part of this property.

For many years, it was used for light manufacturing by Pitney Bowes.

Subsequently, it was a warehouse and production for a production facility.

And toward the end of its occupancy, it was last used as offices and storage for Conair.

However, in the last number of years, it has been vacant and unused.

And the property owners have felt that the best use of this property, given its unique location, would be for residential development.

Originally, and we've been working on this project since 2018.

We were encouraged by the city to talk with industrial users to see if there was any industrial use that could be used put to use on the property.

And the bottom line was there was no active market for that use.

In fact, about the only offer that I'm aware of was the city contacted the owners with an eye toward parking all of its school buses on this site, which certainly would have created something that frankly we think would not be in the best interest of the community.

Bottom line is after determining that there was no market either for commercial or industrial uses, we went to work on a residential development.

That required a number of applications.

The first was to get the master plan changed, and we submitted those applications in 2024, and in May of 2024, the planning board, as their letter indicates, approved the change to the master plan so that the property to the rear would be in a category five, and the property to uh along the street would be in a lower density category.

They also at that time recommended approval of the zone change, which would place the property uh closest uh to the street in an RM1 category, and the property at the rear, which is entirely abutted by either the Innes Arden golf course, the train tracks, or other commercial and industrial uses uh in an RMF zoning district.

We then had discussions with Innis Arden.

Innis Arden had some comments they wanted us to change on the plan.

We made those changes during uh 2024.

We were required to go to the environmental protection board because there's a retaining wall on the southern side of the property that was in a regulated area.

The EPB earlier this year uh approved that change.

And most recently, we were back in front of uh the planning board with regard to the site plan and uh the uh requested uses and special permits, and they again recommended unanimous approval uh of that.

So what's before you this evening are three applications.

One is to change the zone from the MG district to a combination of RM1 and RMF and site and architectural plans, the special permit for large-scale developments, and concerning the affordable units in only the townhouses.

I know the chair uh referenced the fact and it was confirmed by Mr.

Blessing that proper mailing notices were made and submitted to the board, that we posted the appropriate sign required by uh the zoning regulations and together with the required affidavit has been filed with the board.

I'd also like to note that it's been published properly, and the town of Greenwich was required to get notice, and those notices were made and have been filed uh with the zoning board.

The site itself lends itself to residential use.

We originally uh contemplated the entirety of it to be in the RMF district, but decided that it was more appropriate to have a transitional zone in the easterly portion of the property uh fronting on Barry Place.

Uh and that's where the townhouses will be.

I'd also note that the townhouses are larger units designed for families and would be home ownership.

All of them have three bedrooms.

Um the applications before you comply with zoning.

We're not asking for major bonuses.

The height area and bulk requirements are satisfied.

We comply.

In fact, we've overparked.

Uh, we've complied with the BMR and affordable housing requirements, and it complies with the open space requirements.

All of that having been said, I'd like to turn it over to other members of our team.

First of all, Derek Dunes of D'Andria to talk about some of the engineering on the site.

Derek.

Good evening.

Can everybody hear me?

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

Good evening.

Uh I'm Derek Donet from uh the firm of D'Andrea Surveying and Engineering.

Um professional engineer licensed in the state of Connecticut.

And our firm provided the uh site engineering and surveying services for the applicant.

We were tasked to with preparing a detailed site design that would address site grading, utility connections, and managed stormwater runoff, such that the development will not cause any adverse impact on adjacent properties or the local stormwater runoff patterns.

Um let's see.

Can I share screen and I'll quickly review the development with you.

One second.

All right, can everybody see that?

Yes.

All right, great.

Uh so what I have up here, the first exhibit is the uh existing conditions.

And this is the existing conditions prior to the um this darker brown in the middle here is the existing building, uh, which has since been removed.

Uh, it was removed back uh last fall of 2024.

Uh, but as you see from this, the so the whole property itself is 9.2 acres in size.

Uh, it was part of the subdivision that attorney cake mentioned, which broke off the wings hockey arena, which is just up in this area.

This uh just to the north of the site is their access drive coming in, and then the arenas up here.

Uh as he mentioned, uh, to the north here is uh the Metro North Railroad.

Uh we've got uh the Wings Arena and other uh industrial commercial properties also to the north.

Uh the northeast area, the eastern side is Barrie Place with St.

Clements um uh parish across the street, and in its arden is to the south and to the west here.

Um besides the previously existing building, you'll see that the majority of the site, this kind of lighter tan color, that's all the um paved parking that's out there.

So it's a very large, contiguous um impervious surface throughout the property right now.

Uh in the back here, this little uh driveway here leads to the city of Stanford WPCA has a pump station in the rear.

Um, and then as you see, there's a lawn area in the front, and then a lawn area by the pump station as well as a small uh wetlands or excuse me, not wetlands, uh woodland area uh in the rear as well.

Uh, there are the wetlands on the Innis Arden property to the west over here, and another uh set of wetlands uh to the south also on the Innis Arden property here.

Uh the stormwater runoff from the entire site currently flows to both of those wetland areas.

And as you can see from the amount of impervious years, approximately 81% of the site was covered with impervious surfaces prior to the demolition of the building.

So now in comparison, I'll show you the proposed conditions.

All right, so this is now the proposed development.

Um, and so as attorney Kikase had mentioned, the front or the eastern half of this site contains the townhouse units.

There's 60 of them.

And then the rear part, this uh squarish looking building right here.

This is the apartment building in the back here.

For the townhouse units, each of them will have two car garages.

And each unit, um, each unit has a garage space that will be wired for an EV charger.

Uh, there are also visitor parking that can be used as either the tandem spaces in front of some of the garages.

And there's also some exterior parking over here, which will also contain additional EV charging stations and uh ADA compliant parking spaces.

The apartment building.

I'm sorry.

I'm you said over here, but I couldn't.

Oh, sorry about that.

On the eastern side here, if you can see my cursor um towards Barrie Place.

So let's see, let me zoom in here a little bit more.

Okay.

Do you see my cursor now?

Um, so it's it's right here.

So you got bury places on the east.

And once you come into the property, there's some exterior spaces here that are used for visitor parking.

And two of these spaces, one of the handicap and one of the regular ones are also um EV charger spaces there.

Uh in front of the units, you uh the majority of the units, not all of them have uh ability for tandem parking in front of them as well.

So there's lots of um uh visitor parking available on the site.

Uh let's see.

Now, as we go over to the apartment building area, so you have the main drive that comes in from the site, which is all nice, and uh it's uh gonna be a tree line driveway coming in with the sidewalk.

Um, you get to the apartment building, and the apartment building has the front drop-off area here with some parking here.

Um, it also has an exterior surface lot to the north, as well as a ramp that goes down to uh along the back side of the building that goes down towards the a lower level parking um uh parking garage underneath the building.

Uh also up here uh to the north of this exterior lot, there's a um gonna be a fenced in playground area and also a fenced in dog park area.

The the refuse area is inside the building that you access on the northern side here.

There's an access way here for the trucks to come in and uh to pick up refuse.

Um, and then the city's sanitary sewer uh pump station is this orange square all the way over here to the west.

So this driveway access will be maintained, and there will be a uh gate there for their access that'll be fenced off.

Now, as you can see from this, compared to uh the existing conditions exhibit, the biggest improvements you have here are the reduction in impervious surfaces and all the landscaping.

Um, so it's an extensive landscaping plan that's providing lots of trees, bushes, um, lawn areas where currently there's nothing.

Um let's see.

So the existing impervious was about 7.4 acres of impervious, 81% of the site.

Proposed impervious is about 5.1 acres or 55% of the site.

So that's a reduction of 2.3 acres of impervious surfaces as compared to existing conditions.

I never get to say that.

Uh on all my projects, like reducing a site by 2.3 acres of impervious is pretty significant.

Um the extensive landscaping plan uh that Matt Pop is from Environmental Land Solutions uh provided.

It shows it helps provide screening from the neighbors, habitat for the birds and animals, and a lot of it is broken up.

Um you got the uh islands in the parking lot and also little islands here in the main in the driveway areas where the townhouses are.

Uh, and that helps reduce that heat island effect when you have the large contiguous impervious surfaces.

Uh, in addition to the reduction um impervious, that also um uh corresponds to a reduction in stormwater runoff from the site.

Uh so we've reduced runoff um flow and volume by reducing impervious surfaces, and we've met the uh city's drainage manual by adding water quality treatments.

So we have some in the townhouse area where they have um uh hydrodynamic uh oil grid separators as well as these blue here that's some subsurface retention systems for water quality volume, and then for the apartment building um uh driveway area, we have uh rain gardens currently proposed for water quality treatment.

We have uh rain gardens currently proposed for water quality treatment.

Uh these measures will help improve the water quality of the stormwater runoff flow that is directed toward the Innes Arden Golf Club, uh, which they then use for irrigation purposes.

Their irrigation pond is over to the west here.

There's currently a large culvert that runs through the site uh along this blue line where my cursor's going out towards the Innis Arden property, uh, which we'll be tying into.

Um, as I mentioned, uh Matt Pop's uh environment uh uh landscaping plan.

Uh there's also a six-foot-high vinyl fence that will go along the southern property line as well uh that abuts Innis Arden, as well as along the northern property line that uh abuts the wings access driveway.

Uh the combination of extensive landscaping, the fence, and then as you see down here, these dark green areas, which are just off of our property, those are large mature deciduous trees that have a lot of screening.

I think actually there's some coniferous ones in this area as well.

Um, so the combination of all those measures are gonna really help screen this project from the Innes Arden golf course when it's all done.

Uh conservation easement areas as part of the subdivision.

There is a large conservation easement area on the northern part of the property, uh, which in uh it contains the existing wooded area here, uh, this dark uh area here, and then the yellowish area here, which currently is um a paved parking lot, that gets covered and becomes vegetated.

So that will be also uh landscaped area.

The conservation area also, oh excuse me, went too far.

Uh also borders the western property line and partially on the southern property line.

Uh soil remediation.

So I want to talk about that briefly.

Um many years ago, the site was found to have uh some areas of contaminated soil at that time when it was being used for industrial commercial purposes, those areas were cleaned to non-residential standards.

So they were cleaned up for the uh the use they were at the time, but not for residential uses.

Uh those areas were all identified and recorded.

Since then, now that it's going forward with a residential um application, uh, the environmental consultant for the applicant, uh Go Environmental LLC.

They've been in contact with Connecticut DEP regarding the steps that would be required to further remediate the site so that it will be clean to a higher standard that meets both federal and state residential standards.

Uh this is a highly regulated process.

Uh Go Environmental has been out there at the site throughout the demolition process, and additional soil uh testing beneath the old building has taken place.

Um further remediation will take place prior to any residential occupancy of the property.

Um we've received comments from all the different city departments as uh attorney cake has mentioned.

Uh we already received approval from the EPB commission back in February of this year regarding the proposed improvements within the upland review area of the off-site inland wetlands.

Uh we've uh been in talks with TTP.

Uh we have no issues with their comments and are working with them regarding different streetscape improvements, such as sidewalk improvements uh that would benefit the neighborhood.

Uh the engineering bureau and the WPCA have no objection to this application.

They have submitted comments that uh they require to be addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit.

Um so overall, we've reviewed all the city department comments uh that have been issued so far and have no objections to them.

Uh, we would request that if this application be approved, that they become a dish uh conditions of approval as part of the zoning permit.

Uh so in conclusion, um, the site design we have developed is currently proposed, will provide water quality treatment and manage stormwater runoff, such that the development will not cause any adverse impact to adjoining properties or local drainage patterns.

Um I think that's about it from my part of the presentation.

If you have any questions, I will be here.

Um, otherwise, I can pass it off to Ravi to speak about the architectural elements involved.

And I will I'll stop sharing here.

Thank you.

Ravi here.

Yes, he is, and he should be able to unmute.

Yes, this is Ravi Ahuja.

I'm with AWA Design Group.

Guys can hear me?

Yes.

Okay.

Just want to make sure.

And as Mr.

Kakes explained, the extent of the project and uh Darikam also explained the extent of the site plan.

And Mr.

As Mr.

Kokis mentioned that we meet or exceed all the zoning requirements.

And all the drawings shows the extent of the units and the size and height and material of the unit.

And I will leave at that if any other questions I'd be willing.

Anybody have ready to answer those.

Okay.

We will um we will get there.

Um the next part of our presentation, Mr.

Chairman, would be to have representatives of SLR or traffic engineers make a presentation on their findings.

They submitted both a report originally with the applications in 2024 and have recently updated that report.

So I'd like to turn it over to, I believe, uh Kimberly Guthrie.

The one requested by TTP.

Yes.

In their comment letter.

Yes, Mr.

Chairman.

Did we receive that?

Yes.

It's I see a June 5th report.

Is that the late?

Sorry, this is this is Kimberly Guthrie with SLR.

If I could just say we're in the process of revising that traffic study.

Okay.

Yeah, we got the counts performed at the end of last month when school was in session.

So we're in the process of updating that study.

Okay, thank you.

Um go ahead.

Please proceed.

Yes, so I'm Kimberly Guthrie with SLR Consulting.

Uh, we were responsible for uh evaluating the potential traffic-related impacts of this development on the surrounding roadway.

Um, for this evaluation, we collected traffic counts as a baseline.

Um, and as will, as we said, we recollected those counts just this past fall as part of those TTP comments.

Um, we also uh estimated the trips generated by the proposed residential development and analyze the build versus no build condition or with and without the development.

Um and our findings suggest that there would be minimal impact to the roadway network traffic flows.

Um as was said, we received comments from the city office of transportation traffic and parking, um, which was to collect new counts, which we did, and we don't anticipate those counts and our updated study to have any significant revisions to the previous, the previously prepared report.

Uh we've also prepared a transportation demand management and parking management plan, where we found given the proximity to public transportation and pedestrian and bicycle facilities travel by means other than single occupancy vehicles is likely.

Um, and further based on statistical parking data for similar developments, we expect the proposed parking to be sufficient for residents.

Um we expect to address and address the comments from the TTP and get the revised analysis completed this month.

Okay, thank you.

I just uh following up on Kimberly's comments.

I'd point out that as an industrially used property, uh it generated a fairly heavy use by trucks, which would be minimized and essentially uh stopped.

So to benefit the neighborhood, we believe that the truck traffic in and of itself is a uh big benefit uh and one that frankly we thought should be pointed out.

Bottom line, Mr.

Chairman, we believe the three applications before you number one to change the zoning map, number two, the special permits, and number three, the site and architectural uh plans and requested uses, all satisfy the zoning requirements.

In particular, the special permits satisfy the section 2C.2 uh of your regulations.

The master plan is clearly consistent with the proposed uses and development.

Uh the planning board has recommended approval unanimously uh on all three applications.

Uh the this residential development, we believe will be a substantial improvement to the neighborhood.

Uh as Kimberly just testified, the resulting traffic patterns and the adequacy of the streets, particularly in light of the comments from TTP, uh, which we're happy to work with them on, uh, will be satisfied.

Uh so the location nature and proposed uses on this site are consistent with the master plan, consistent with good planning, satisfy your zoning regulations, and we respectfully request that they be granted in all respects.

Good.

Thank you.

And um I want to compliment you on what is it, a very complete application.

Um Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

We have a very good team.

Yes, you sure do.

Um I'm gonna want to suggest that we uh take a quick break.

Um so why don't we break for about um 10 minutes now and then we can uh go on until uh whatever time uh it takes to get through this for tonight.

So um let's it's nine o'clock.

Sorry, 859.

So why don't we pick up at uh nine minutes after um nine?

And um Ralph, if you could stop the recording, please.

Uh yes, I still