EAST LYME PLANNING COMMISSION
Scrolling down or clicking the bookmarks will take you to the minutes for meetings held in November.
| Public Hearing I, November 13, 2007 |
| Regular Meeting November 13, 2007 |
PUBLIC HEARING I Tuesday, NOVEMBER 13th, 2007
EAST LYME PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
The East Lyme Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on its’ own application for a proposed amendment to the Subdivision Regulations establishing a moratorium, not to exceed eighteen (18) months, on residential subdivisions that require construction of a new Town Road, on November 13, 2007 at Town Hall, 108 Pennsylvania Avenue, Niantic, CT. Chairman Picarazzi opened this continued Public Hearing and called it to order at 7:04 PM.
PRESENT: Lisa Picarazzi, Chairman, Francine Schwartz, Secretary, Greg Ellis, Jack Hogan, Steve Carpenteri, Paul Dagle
ALSO PRESENT: Mary Beth Carver, Alternate
Sandy Mulholland, Alternate
Meg Parulis, Planning Director
ABSENT: Richard Quelle, Alternate
Pledge of Allegiance
The Pledge was observed.
1. Application of the Planning Commission for a proposed amendment to the Subdivision Regulations establishing a moratorium, not to exceed eighteen (18) months, on residential subdivisions that require construction of a new Town Road.
Ms. Picarazzi said that this is a Planning Commission initiative and that this Public Hearing was continued from October 9, 2007. She polled the Commissioners to make sure that everyone had reviewed the tapes if they were not present for the previous Public Hearing session.
Mr. Ellis, Mr. Hogan and Mr. Carpenteri said that they had reviewed the tapes and were up to date with the proceedings.
Ms. Picarazzi then asked Ms. Parulis if she had any follow-up items or comments.
Ms. Parulis said that the earliest effective date now would have to be November 16, 2007. They could have the notice in the newspaper for this Thursday and make it effective for Friday. She noted that while they typically give the full 15 days after publication for any appeals that as this is their own initiative, they could make it effective earlier than the 15 days. The other choice that they have is to allow for the full 15 days and to make it effective for December 1, 2007. She noted that she did not have any other Exhibits to enter into the record at this time.
Ms. Picarazzi called for anyone from the public who wished to speak in favor of this proposal –
Thomas Wingardner, 95 Walnut Hill Road submitted his commentary in favor of the moratorium to the Commissioners. This was entered into the record as Exhibit 21. He then read it into the record (Copy of full presentation attached at end of Minutes).
Kelvin Cooper, 44 Cardinal Road said that he supports the moratorium and sees it as a means to upgrade the regulations to protect the water and the future.
Maureen Bell, 14 Upper Walnut Hill Road said that she is in favor of the moratorium and thinks that it is the right thing to do to move forward with insight.
Tony Attanasio, 97 West Main Street said that he agrees with everything that has been said in favor of the moratorium and that he also feels that they need it to be able to put some teeth into the Conservation Commission actions as he has seen them operating without any real enforcement power.
Bob Hudyma, 41 Grassy Hill Road said that he is a third generation farmer, and that there is still a drought going on as his ponds have still not recovered yet. He said that they need to take a look at what is going on in the south where they need to import water as that could be us. He has never seen such a low water table at this time of the year before.
Barbara Wingardner, 95 Walnut Hill Road said that she is in favor of this moratorium as it shows forward thinking.
Ms. Picarazzi called for anyone who wished to speak against this application.
John Jensen, 3 Larchwood Lane said that he does not doubt that there are issues within the regulations that need updating however, there are property rights that people have and 18 months is way too long of a time to deny them their rights and it will also involve the Town in lawsuits from property owners. They need to address these issues in a much shorter time frame. If they need to do the regulations then they should take two to three weeks to write them and vote on them as it does not take 18 months to write them; to just work on them as the way that they are proposing doing this is taking way too long and will cause lawsuits for the Town.
Ms. Picarazzi called for anyone else who wished to speak regarding this application –
Hearing non one –
Ms. Picarazzi asked if the Commission members had other questions, comments, discussion –
Mr. Ellis asked if the time frame for the moratorium was to be changed if they would have to go back through the Public Hearing process.
Ms. Parulis said that they have all discussed a shorter time frame before and that she did not see a problem with that but that she would need to know specifically what they are talking about.
Mr. Ellis said that he has heard six (6) months to nine (9) months mentioned.
Ms. Parulis said that time frame would be covered and would not require another Public Hearing.
Mr. Dagle said that they have discussed before that if they finish earlier that they could lift the moratorium.
Ms. Parulis said that was correct.
Ms. Picarazzi asked Ms. Parulis if she has any concerns about being able to reach her objective with the 12 months time frame in light of a new administration coming in and department resources.
Ms. Parulis said that this could be an issue but that she does want to tap into NEMO for help and that the only issue is that they would also have other applications coming in and they would have to be handled. She added that she also wants Public Works and Emergency Management to review the stormwater regulations and weigh in on them. She said that twelve months would be reasonable.
Ms. Picarazzi asked about a mechanism/schedule tool by which she would report to the Commission on this and they would be able to monitor this progress.
Ms. Parulis said that she does not have anything in place at this time but that it would be reported at each meeting and that she would set something up.
Ms. Picarazzi asked if the Commission had any other questions –
Hearing none –
Ms. Picarazzi closed this Public Hearing at 7:28 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Karen Zmitruk,
Recording Secretary
List of Exhibits
Planning Commission Proposed Moratorium Public Hearing
Exhibit 1 – Letter from Attorney Harris dated 9/18/07 to Chairman Picarazzi with Case Law Attachments
Exhibit 2 – Statement of Kelvin Cooper dated 9/18/07
Exhibit 3 – Letter to Chairman Picarazzi from Robert Blatt dated 9/17/07 authorizing Jeffrey Torrance to act on his behalf for NE National LLC and Darrow’s Ridge
Exhibit 4 – Letter from Attorneys Chorches & Novak to Attorney Dan Cunningham dated 9/13/07 – Re: NE National LLC Chapter 11 Case – Breach of Contract
Exhibit 5 – Letter from Robert Blatt dated 9/17/07 to Attorney Ed O’Connell Re: Moratorium Conflict with Darrow’s Ridge and NE National LLC Bankruptcy Case
Exhibit 6 – Attorneys Tobin, Carberry, O’Malley etc. Letter to EL Planning Commission dated 9/17/07 – Re: Ben Orvedal opposition to a proposed moratorium
Exhibit 7 – 2005 Planning Commission Work Plan Progress list as of 9/18/07
Exhibit 8 – Letter to Fred Thumm dated 2/2/99 from Mike Giannattasio on the Storm water Phase II Regulations
Exhibit 9 – Niantic River Watershed Protection Plan dated September 2006
Exhibit 10 – NEMO Municipal Initiative Program
Exhibit 11 – Jordan Cove – Urban Watershed Project
Exhibit 12 – 2004 CT Storm water Quality Manual by the CT DEP
Exhibit 13 – Copy of Notice of Public Hearing to Town Clerk dated 9/5/07 and copy of the legal ad published in the Day on 9/7/07 and 9/14/07
Exhibit 14 – Copy of Section 10 of the 1999 POCD that has been referred to
Exhibit 15 – A Table of Subdivisions from 1999 through August 24, 2007 that have been approved citing the number of lots and building permits
Exhibit 16 – Letter dated 9/18/07 from Attorney O’Connell responding to a letter from Attorney Novak – Re: Conflict of Interest
Exhibit 17 – Practice of Watershed Protection – Techniques for protecting the nations’ streams, lakes, rivers and estuaries by Tom Schueler – Year 2000
Exhibit 18 – A Sampling of Recommended Practices in the 2004 CT Storm water Manual not incorporated in the East Lyme Subdivision Regulations
Exhibit 19 – Information Letter from Attorney Marjorie Shansky dated 10/9/07 – Re: Proposed Moratorium on Subdivisions with Town Roads
Exhibit 20 – Email read into record and submitted by Tom Kalal from Jim Gibbons (UCONN, NEMO) dated 10/9/07 – Re: Opinion on Planning Commission and Moratoriums
Exhibit 21 – Letter/Statement in favor of the moratorium from Thomas Wingardner, 95 Walnut Hill Rd. dated 11/13/07 as submitted and read into the record by Mr. Wingardner
.
REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, NOVEMBER 13th, 2007
EAST LYME PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
PRESENT: Lisa Picarazzi, Chairman, Francine Schwartz, Secretary, Greg Ellis, Jack Hogan, Steve Carpenteri, Paul Dagle
ALSO PRESENT: Mary Beth Carver, Alternate
Sandy Mulholland, Alternate
Meg Parulis, Planning Director
ABSENT: Richard Quelle, Alternate
Chairman Picarazzi called this Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:30 PM after the previously scheduled Public Hearing.
Pledge of Allegiance
The Pledge was previously observed.
I. Public Delegations
Public Delegations is the time when members of the public are invited to speak to the Commission about certain matters. Issues or concerns related to approved subdivisions under construction (Item IV.) and in-house proposals or general topics of discussion (Item VII.) are open to comment. Items, referrals, or applications subject to a decision by the Commission, a public hearing, or in litigation may not be discussed. The members of the Commission will not directly answer questions or make comment during delegations.
Ms. Picarazzi called for Public Delegations.
Ms. Parulis noted that they do have a re-application for Walnut Hill so that is something that cannot be discussed under Public Delegations.
There were no delegations.
Mr. Ellis asked Ms. Picarazzi if they could move the discussion on the 2008 Meeting Schedule up to the first item under Other Business when they got there as it related to their moratorium discussion.
Ms. Picarazzi said that they could.
II. Approval of Minutes – Public Hearing Minutes of October 2, 2007
Regular Meeting Minutes of October 2, 2007
Public Hearing Minutes of October 9, 2007
Special Meeting Minutes of October 9, 2007
Ms. Picarazzi called for any discussion or corrections to the Planning Commission Public Hearing Minutes of October 2, 2007.
**MOTION (1)
Mr. Ellis moved to approve the Public Hearing Minutes of the Planning Commission on October 2, 2007 as presented.
Ms. Schwartz seconded the motion.
VOTE: 5 – 0 – 1. Motion passed.
Abstained: Mr. Hogan
Ms. Picarazzi called for any discussion or corrections to the Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes of October 2, 2007.
**MOTION (2)
Mr. Ellis moved to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of the Planning Commission on October 2, 2007 as presented.
Mr. Dagle seconded the motion.
VOTE: 5 – 0 – 1. Motion passed.
Abstained: Mr. Hogan
Ms. Picarazzi called for any discussion or corrections to the Planning Commission Public Hearing Minutes of October 9, 2007.
**MOTION (3)
Ms. Schwartz moved to approve the Public Hearing Minutes of the Planning Commission on October 9, 2007 as presented.
Mr. Dagle seconded the motion.
VOTE: 3 – 0 – 3. Motion passed.
Abstained: Mr. Carpenteri, Mr. Ellis, Mr. Hogan
Ms. Picarazzi called for any discussion or corrections to the Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes of October 9, 2007.
**MOTION (4)
Mr. Dagle moved to approve the Special Meeting Minutes of the Planning Commission on October 9, 2007 as presented.
Ms. Schwartz seconded the motion.
VOTE: 3 – 0 – 3. Motion passed.
Abstained: Mr. Carpenteri, Mr. Ellis, Mr. Hogan
III. Subdivision Applications
Ms. Parulis said that Walnut Hill would be coming and that they would probably be setting a Public Hearing date for it at their next meeting.
IV. Subdivisions (Approved and Under Construction)
(A list of approved subdivisions under construction will be posted on the Town web-site @ www.eltownhall.com under “Planning Commission”. The Active Subdivision List will also be available upon request in the Land Use Office. This agenda item shall be reserved for items requiring administrative action by the Planning Commission for already approved subdivisions.)
1. The Orchards at East Lyme Subdivision – East Lyme Housing Ventures – Request for Bond Reduction Phase I & Phase III including sewers on Boston Post Road.
Ms. Parulis said that they are not quite ready for this yet and that Engineering is still reviewing it.
2. Nottingham Hills Subdivision – Niantic Real Estate LLC – Request for release of Erosion Control Bond for Phase IIA & Phase III.
Ms. Parulis said that Engineering is still reviewing this also.
Attorney Harris said that he understands that the Town Engineer has not finished his review yet on this and asked if they would entertain making a motion to reduce the bond in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer.
Ms. Parulis said that she would not do this for the Orchards and that she did not want to set a precedent now.
Ms. Picarazzi and Ms. Parulis said that they would not entertain a motion at this time.
V. Zoning Referrals
There were none.
VI. 8-24 Referrals (Municipal Improvements)
There were none.
VII. Other Business
1. Meeting Schedule for 2008
Ms. Picarazzi called for discussion on the proposed schedule that they had in their packets.
Mr. Ellis suggested that they should meet twice per month as meetings or just as working group sessions to insure that there would be work groups and that the regulations would be updated.
Ms. Parulis said that they could certainly add a meeting as a working group as needed – or as the second meeting of the month. She said that she envisions breaking up into a couple of different groups and that it would be easier to advertise it as a subcommittee meeting. She said that she understands them wanting to hold that third Tuesday evening open however, they could also determine it during the first regular meeting that they hold each month.
Mr. Dagle said that he agreed with Mr. Ellis and added that with all of the work that has to be done that they need to commit to the schedule even if they add them later. He thinks that they need a specific agenda that will go along with these meetings.
Ms. Parulis said that it would be the third Tuesday or the second meeting of the month and the first meeting would be the Regular Meeting.
Mr. Hogan suggested that they set the second meeting of the month up as workshop meetings and that they do not schedule any second meetings for January, November or December. January and November 2008 are already meeting on the third Tuesday due to holidays. He said that he was ready to make a motion on this.
**MOTION (5)
Mr. Hogan moved to accept the proposed schedule of regular meetings for the Planning Commission for 2008 as presented AND to add Workshop Meetings for the third Tuesday of all of the months in 2008 EXCEPT for January, November and December. (New schedule attached at end of minutes)
Mr. Ellis seconded the motion.
VOTE: 6 – 0 – 0. Motion passed.
2. Proposed Amendment to the Subdivision Regulations establishing a Moratorium, not to exceed eighteen (18) months, on residential subdivisions that require construction of a new Town Road.
Mr. Dagle said that based upon past practice of the 15 day notice period that he thought that Friday, November 30, 2007 would be a more practical date to have this be effective, if they decide this way.
The Commissioners were in agreement on this.
Mr. Hogan said that he is still in favor of the 18 months as presented.
Mr. Dagle said that he thinks that the 12 months gives them a good deal of time and it should allow them to minimize the restrictions on peoples’ land use and any lawsuits.
Ms. Picarazzi agreed with this.
Ms. Schwartz said that originally she felt that 18 months was appropriate but after hearing the argument that Mr. Dagle has brought forward that she now feels that 12 months is reasonable.
Mr. Ellis said that he finds that if you are given a certain amount of time to get things done that somehow you do get them done in that time and that he finds that most people tend to operate in this way.
Mr. Dagle asked Ms. Parulis what her feeling is retarding the Town agencies being on board and helping with this is.
Ms. Parulis said that she thinks that it should be okay and that if for some reason it changes that this could also be revisited at another time.
Ms. Picarazzi said that she feels better hearing that.
**MOTION (6)
Mr. Ellis moved to approve the resolution concerning the proposed amendment to the subdivision regulations establishing a moratorium, not to exceed twelve (12) months, on residential subdivisions that require construction of a new Town road.
WHEREAS, a primary goal of the 1999 Plan of Conservation and Development is to maintain and, where possible, enhance the environmental quality of East Lyme’s land and water resources. Specifically, Section 10 of the Plan recommends incorporation of Stormwater Best Management Practices to mitigate the potential contamination of surface or groundwater associated with development (Exhibit #14).
WHEREAS, studies have shown that pollutant loads from new developments are directly related to imperviousness (Schuler, 1987). When watershed development exceeds 10 to 15% impervious cover, it is extremely difficult to maintain predevelopment stream quality. Because roads are directly connected to the storm drain system, they exert a greater hydrological impact than roof-top related imperviousness that can be spread out over pervious areas such as backyards. (Schuler and Holland, 2000 – Exhibit #17) Further the percentage of imperviousness due to roof-tops is controlled by the maximum density and ground coverage requirements in the Zoning Regulations. Therefore, the most significant opportunity to reduce the share of imperviousness from the road system lies with the design standards for new roads and associated drainage in the Subdivision Regulations.
WHEREAS, the East Lyme Planning Commission has determined that current design standards for new roads and associated drainage within the Subdivision Regulations are not consistent with the 2004 Connecticut Stormwater Quality Manual and recommendations in the 1999 Plan of Conservation and Development. (Exhibit #12, #18)
WHEREAS, impairment of the Niantic River has been linked to non-point source pollution from stormwater run-off in the Niantic River Watershed Protection Plan. Failure to implement best management practices could result in other water body impairments and potentially require costly retrofits (Exhibit #9).
WHEREAS, it has been demonstrated through the Jordan Cove Urban Watershed Project among others that implementation of stormwater best management practices can reduce pollutant levels and maintain pre-development run-off rates and volumes (Exhibit #11).
WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that in order to protect public health and safety; a moratorium on the creation of new Town roads through subdivision is necessary to develop and implement upgraded standards for road construction and determine standard operation and maintenance policies of stormwater management facilities within subdivisions. This effort will require coordination with the Public Works Department and Emergency Management. The Commission will seek outside technical assistance through participation in the Non-point Source Education for Municipal Officials (NEMO) Connecticut Municipal Initiative; a program of the UCONN Center for Land Use Education and Research (CLEAR). During the moratorium, the Commission will also undertake a comprehensive review and update of the Subdivision Regulations to implement standards that encourage low impact design through proper site planning based on the following concepts as recommended in the 2004 CT Stormwater Quality Manual, all or which are affected by road layout:
à Designing the Development to Fit the Terrain
à Limiting Land Disturbance Activities
à Reducing or Disconnecting Impervious Areas
à Preserving and Utilizing Natural Drainage Systems
à Providing Setbacks and Vegetated Buffers
à Minimizing the creation of Steep Slopes
à Maintaining Pre-Development Vegetation
WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that twelve (12) months is a reasonable period of time to accomplish the above. The moratorium will not prevent the construction of new single-family homes on previously approved lots, nor will it affect any applications submitted prior to the effective date of the moratorium or those that do not require the construction of a new Town road. There are currently over 200 approved lots available for construction. The average rate of new building permits for single family homes experienced over the last 5 years is approximately 60 per year. The moratorium will not adversely affect the current rate of single-family home development in East Lyme.
BE IT RESOLVED, under the authority granted in CGS 8-25 to adopt regulations governing the subdivision of land, the East Lyme Subdivision Regulations are amended as follows:
(New) 3-5 Effective November 30, 2007, no application for residential subdivision or re-subdivision that includes construction of a Town road will be accepted, considered or approved for a time period not to exceed twelve (12) months from the effective date of this amendment.
Ms. Schwartz seconded the motion.
VOTE: 5 – 0 – 1. Motion passed.
Abstained: Mr. Carpenteri
3. Open Space Plan – Presentation by Art Carlson, Chairman Open Space Steering Committee
Art Carlson said that he has six (6) charts to show them but prior to that he said that as background, that he was the Chairman of the Conservation Commission from 1968-1972 and that they were involved in enacting the wetlands act. He was also involved with the last POCD update. Now, he is involved with the Open Space Committee.
He said that there are about 50 different definitions of Open Space and that they took the questions of how much will it cost everyone?; and what good is it?; and chose to answer them. He said that they took a map of the Town and marked off every lot of 10 acres or more to show what is perceived as open space. The next chart they entitled ‘Open, Open Space’ and denoted the open space that you could walk on and use. The Yale Property and State owned properties were designated aside from this ‘open, open space’.
They set up various criteria as being the functions of open space and these included:
à It should protect the drinking water
à It should provide water access such as to Pattagansett lake
à It should provide for active and passive recreation
à It should be a forest block or greenway
à Prime farmland – for a renewed interest in agriculture
à Have unique geological features
à Bio-diversity
He noted that the eight mile river study ended up where they ended up with having to look at the watershed first. They have wells within the watersheds and the aquifers are there and all of the water travels seaward. They have the Pattagansett aquifer, Bride lake aquifer and Latimer Brook aquifer. If water is slowed down, it has better percolation which binds the bad chemicals.
He then presented the open space plan board and said that they have to work with what they have and explained that they look at the big areas as the one-acre areas do not help. On this board they delineated in yellow the desired open space. When people were asked what they were interested in, many said that they wanted walking paths.
In the active open space plan board he said that what they have now is depicted in green. In the last plan board entitled ‘open space vision’ he said that there are areas that they have indicated that they would be interested in for open space. As an example he cited the White Gate Farm area as it would encourage agriculture and allow access to the water. He suggested that they encourage agriculture in the Town whether is be on three acres or 33 acres. The issue here is that there is no ombudsman to address this and to carry it forward. As he sees it, what they need to do it to further protect the drinking water; put in the 30 miles of footpaths; increase agriculture; acquire active recreation land; increase access to the fresh and saltwater areas and all of this will be an investment in our future to protect something that is not made anymore.
4. POCD Update – Draft Survey, Formation of POCD Committees
Ms. Parulis said that she was basically looking to have the telephone survey done during the first week in December. The consultant did not think that the survey was too long even though it has some 60 questions. They think that it will take 15 minutes to administer to each person and they will tell the people upfront how long it will take. She said that she will be issuing a press release so that people will know about it if they are called and what to expect.
Ms. Picarazzi asked about the people who want to answer it and who are not called.
Ms. Parulis said that she does not have anything set up for that right now and that she wants the controlled survey to be done first and the results to be separate from the other surveys that people just want to fill out. The phone survey is a scientific one and they will not have any money left over to do a mailing for those who are not called but they will have them available on-line or at places where they can be picked up or filled out and dropped off.
Ms. Picarazzi said that she wants to understand the difference between the controlled phone survey and any others that are filled out and how they are going to be tabulated.
Ms. Parulis said that the phone survey would be tabulated separately by the company administering it and that the others they have not yet determined how they will be tabulated.
Mr. Ellis said that the more input that they get that the better it will be.
Ms. Parulis said that the phone survey is totally random by demographic representation and that the only question of concern was the one regarding income. She said that she was told by the survey people that they know that many people do not wish to answer it and don’t answer it and that it can be taken out – it is up to the Commission if they want to keep it in.
Ms. Picarazzi asked for a consensus on this question regarding income and it was felt that it should be taken out so as not to skew things or to insult people as some people are uncomfortable being asked that question.
Ms. Parulis said that she would remove question #56 on income from the survey on income.
After further discussion regarding the survey questions it was decided to have questions 21 and 22 asked for both Niantic and Flanders; to add commercial/retail to question 29; delete questions 41, 46 and 48; add/Facilities to question 42; and change Intermediate to under/over pass in question 45.
**MOTION (7)
Mr. Hogan moved that they move forward on the phone survey for the POCD update as discussed and amended.
Mr. Ellis seconded the motion.
VOTE: 6 – 0 – 0. Motion passed.
Ms. Parulis said that she would issue a press release that the phone survey would be done during the first week in December and that after that, copies of the survey will be available for the general public to answer.
VIII. Reports
1. Chairman
Ms. Picarazzi said that that three of their members will be leaving after this meeting. She offered congratulations to Mr. Hogan who will be on the Board of Selectmen; Mr. Carpenteri who will be on the Zoning Commission and to Mr. Ellis who has served them for many years. She thanked all of them and wished them well.
Mr. Hogan said that he will have to resign to go to the Board of Selectmen and thanked the people who have come and participated in their meetings. He said that he will see if he can be assigned to be the Ex-Officio to Planning so that he can stay in tune with everything. He thanked his fellow Commission members and said that he has enjoyed working with them in trying to do what is best for the Town.
Mr. Ellis thanked everyone and said that it has been a pleasure working with them.
Mr. Carpenteri thanked everyone and said that he has enjoyed working with everyone as they are a great bunch of people.
Ms. Picarazzi said that she also wanted to report that she attended a shopping center development conference in Rocky Hill recently that was interesting. A lot of regional planning discussion went on as well as discussions on open space and what the cost of that land coming off of the tax rolls was and how much it would cost the rest of the taxpayers since it was no longer generating revenue. She urged then to attend a conference like this if they have the opportunity to do so.
Mr. Dagle suggested that Ms. Picarazzi ask all of the alternates if any of them are interested in being a regular member prior to advertising the position since they will have to fill Mr. Hogan’s position. He said that he would also suggest keeping the Commission bipartisan as it has been as it has worked well.
2. Zoning Representative
There was no one present from the Zoning Commission.
3. Regional Planning Commission Representative – Greg Ellis, Ashley Schinella, Alternate
Mr. Ellis said that he did not have anything to report.
4. Rte. 11 Greenway
Ms. Parulis said that she did not have anything new here and that they are still waiting for the record of decision on the money. The $10M would be made available at a rate of $2M per year.
5. Ex-Officio – Joe Raia
Mr. Raia was not present.
6. Staff/Communications
Ms. Parulis said that she did not have anything further to report.
ADJOURNMENT
**MOTION (8)
Mr. Ellis moved to adjourn this Regular Meeting of the East Lyme Planning Commission at 9:12 PM.
Mr. Hogan seconded the motion.
VOTE: 6 – 0 – 0. Motion passed.
Respectfully submitted,
Karen Zmitruk,
Recording Secretary