[0:06] Okay, we're recording. Go ahead.
>> Welcome everyone. I'd like to call to
[0:11] order this Thursday, September 3rd, 2026
meeting of the Mass Planning and Zoting
[0:16] Commission. And um the first
item I'd like to do is add an add an
[0:22] item to the agenda.
So, we need to get a motion to add an
[0:27] agenda item. I'd like to discuss the
venue for the continuation of 26-29.
[0:33] Uh the that's the Mil Road application
and um because we I wanted to get a vote
[0:40] from the commission on that, we need to
add it as a special agenda item. So,
[0:43] could I have a motion?
>> Thank you.
[0:46] » Second, thanks. Everybody following me?
Okay. All in favor?
[0:52] » Jen, can you hear? Okay.
>> Okay. Great. Um, I thought we'd discuss
[0:57] it when we get down to 26-29 Mil Road.
Okay. So, with that out of the way, I'd
[1:03] like to go ahead and read the process
for public hearings because we have one
[1:06] public hearing this evening. Um,
during the
[1:11] » You're still here.
>> I'm going to do that when I get down
[1:15] here. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. During the
public hearing, the applicant will be
[1:19] invited to present the application
explaining to the commission and others
[1:22] present what is being requested. The
applicant or staff will share all
[1:26] application materials on the screen as
needed. Comments of town agencies will
[1:30] be read for each application if there
are any. Next, there will be clarifying
[1:34] questions from the commissioners. Then
there will be an opportunity for
[1:36] clarifying questions and comments from
the public attending in person and via
[1:40] Zoom. For Zoom attendance, please raise
your hand through the Zoom platform and
[1:44] wait to be called on and unmuted. As
this public hearing must be recorded,
[1:48] all attendees must state their names and
addresses before asking questions.
[1:52] Public questions and comments should be
concise and address issues related to
[1:55] the application. Questions and comments
from the public are to be directed to
[1:59] the applicant, not to the commission
when necessary for the sake of time and
[2:03] to give everyone a fair chance to speak.
They will be limited to 5 minutes or
[2:07] less. Public comments supporting
previous comments need not repeat those
[2:10] comments but can simply endorse them. We
ask that we we treat each other
[2:15] respectfully throughout the meeting.
Personal attacks on the applicants andor
[2:18] commissions commissioners will not be
tolerated. The applicant will have an
[2:22] opportunity to address any questions or
concerns raised by the commissioners and
[2:26] the public. Once the public hearing is
closed, the applicant is free to leave
[2:30] or remain for the balance of the regular
meeting during which the commission will
[2:33] try to reach a decision on each
application. Each applicant will be
[2:37] notified in writing as to the direct
decision of the commission and has a
[2:40] right to appeal to the superior court if
desired. Decisions of this m meeting are
[2:45] available the day after the meeting by
following the land use department at
[2:48] 203245-55631
after 9:00 a.m. The recording of this
[2:54] meeting will be made available on the
town website for viewing. Seated this
[2:58] evening are Mike Fugda. Um Michelle
Clark, I would like to see you replace
[3:03] Jen G if that's okay.
>> Sure. Um,
[3:08] Vice Chair John Dooza
and Secretary John Morgan, Bob O' Conor,
[3:14] Janet Tekken via Zoom, and myself, Carol
Snow, chair. Staff present this evening
[3:20] is Aaron Manx, town planner, and the
planner read for legal notice.
[3:27] Notice is hereby given that the Madison
Planning and Zoning Commission will hold
[3:30] a public hearing on Thursday, September
3rd, 2026, beginning at 7 p.m. in
[3:35] meeting room A, the James Madison room,
Town Campus, 8 Campus Drive, Madison,
[3:41] Connecticut 06443.
This is a hybrid meeting and attendees
[3:45] may also join via Zoom webinar either
through the webinar link or call in
[3:49] information below. The webinar ID is
91581966735.
[3:57] The password is 452138
and the dialin number is 6465588656.
[4:06] The following application will be heard
number 26-32
[4:11] plus coastal site plan for 908 Boston
Post Road map 39 lot 4 zone R2. the
[4:19] owner applicant, uh, Nicholas and Nancy
Robert. Uh, again, this is a coastal
[4:25] site plan application. It's a site plan
modification in major downtown village
[4:29] district application to modify porch
railings, patio, and walkway for unit in
[4:34] a small cluster housing development.
Copies of this application are available
[4:39] for inspection in the land use office.
Further details on how to participate in
[4:43] the webinar posted on the town of
Madison website, www.mmadisonct.org.
[4:49] org. All written correspondence can be
submitted to the land use department via
[4:53] email to land usemisonct.org.
Dial 2032455631
[5:01] for assistance. Dated atmadison
Connecticut this 14th day of August
[5:05] 2026. Carol Snow chair. This was
published once in the New Haven Register
[5:10] on August 20th and once in the source on
August 27th.
[5:16] » Thank you, Erin. Could I have a motion
then to open 26-32
[5:21] plus a coast site plan for 908 bus
second
[5:26] honor any further discussion on the day
that open the public hearing
[5:31] good to go.
>> Hi my name is Dickson. I'm the architect
[5:34] of general's residence development and
I'm the architect for this new owner of
[5:40] this this unit that wants to make some
minor modifications which you've seen I
[5:47] think but I'll go over them with you.
The one area which is uh visually uh
[5:52] present as with all of these but I think
would make a a difference was approved
[5:57] by the Madison Historical Commission,
Madison um Madison so Society, the
[6:02] Madison store commission and also
advisory council and community parents
[6:07] and accord approved by the homeowners
association of the unit. So four
[6:12] approvals so far this I think is the
last approval before the direction.
[6:18] The one area that the one area that is I
would say visually present is the
[6:23] putting in of a low fence which was
which was a railing which was on the
[6:27] original home and the historical
commission said they they thought they
[6:31] didn't really need to have it in the
fact that we raised up this earth. It's
[6:34] not required by code but they but the
homeowners would like to be able to sit
[6:38] up there and they they felt that they
need a little bit more of the barrier.
[6:41] So we simply make the barrier that was
there before putting back. Um at the at
[6:47] the front we have two walkways that come
that come out to the street and they are
[6:52] now just simply 2ft by 3 foot pieces of
blue stone with 6 in in between them.
[6:57] They'd like to make them into tiny
fashion patterned uh both both units
[7:03] tiny bashlar um walkways walk they're
done in sand with black and sand the
[7:10] rear which no one sees but is something
that's they change is that we actually
[7:16] have this raised deck that was done by
the first owner and these owners would
[7:21] like to have what everybody else has in
the entire place which between which
[7:24] between which these straw terraces which
are in the area that was designated
[7:28] as an intentional development for for
that area. So, we're dropping that down
[7:32] using the same stone walls. Then, the
sort of two enhancements are that I
[7:36] think about a project I worked on a
while ago, we may be able to we may be
[7:43] able to shroud utility uh boxes with
painted wood, which would be really
[7:49] nice. They could do it, but it's been
done somewhere else. So, I'm going to
[7:52] ask them to do that. They like to have a
two/3 light door, you know, which is
[7:57] sort of what they had before, but they
would like to have light come through
[8:00] versus a big door. There's a half
there's a there's a 3 foot6 in high wall
[8:05] at the back, which again, nobody sees.
They want to put plants on top of that.
[8:10] So, I think that's pretty much all the
things that go into
[8:17] » I would ask if you could like slide it
down this way and probably put it in
[8:19] front so Janet can see it.
>> Yeah,
[8:21] » because it's on the Janet, are you
seeing it on?
[8:24] » Oh, I can see it. I can see I can see it
on the screen.
[8:27] » Hi, Janet.
>> Yeah, thank you. Hi.
[8:32] » Is there any wood?
>> Yes. Yes, they made a break. The aka
[8:35] made it very clear. They want wood. And
I said, "Well, I hate to get the right
[8:38] wood. There's not a lot of good wood
paint anymore." So, they they were
[8:41] saying Newland's quite fine, but it'll
be wood. So, that's great.
[8:45] » And who do you need to get permission
from about the boxes for the electrical?
[8:49] Uh that would be the baed northeast
buildings.
[8:53] » Is that sweet?
>> Yeah. And it's uh a ring of hell. So
[8:58] there we go.
>> Where's the house?
[9:00] » It's not it's not as bad as conad. And
also I'm I'm being a pleasant knowing
[9:04] something somewhere. It's called like oh
up in Buffalo there's something called
[9:09] grid and apparently grid in Buffalo is
worse than anywhere on the planet. So,
[9:14] um, the hypothes
[9:21] Yeah.
>> Oh, this little guy. Yes.
[9:22] » No, no, I'm sorry. The stone the stone
stuff.
[9:25] » Yes. The the these the walkways.
>> Didn't we have a a height restriction?
[9:30] » This Well, these are at grade the these
two guys are are grade walkways.
[9:34] » Okay.
>> And then these and these guys here are
[9:36] basically city walls and match the other
city walls that are in the place
[9:39] » in height.
>> Yes.
[9:40] » Okay.
So they're like 18 inches too.
[9:48] » Any questions or comments? Thank you for
keeping the spirit of the general rest.
[9:54] » Are you kidding me?
We did measure of love. It's been a long
[9:58] and involved process.
>> Once he did my wedding
[10:03] every month he does what he does and
actually I love his daily ch.
[10:08] » Janet any questions or comments? I I had
I was having trouble hearing duo. So,
[10:13] but I think everything looked fine in
the drawing.
[10:16] » Yeah.
>> And I and I know that area so well that
[10:19] I I know what the wall is going to look
like and [clears throat] it'll be great.
[10:23] » I see it from where you're sitting.
>> I know, right? I can I can see it out my
[10:28] front window.
>> Yeah. [laughter]
[10:31] » Okay. Any other questions or comments?
>> Not.
[10:36] » In that case, could I have a motion to
close the public hearing? Oh, sorry.
[10:41] » Public
>> the public street public.
[10:45] » Thank you. Any questions or comments
from
[10:47] » Jim Nordin, 387 Boston Post Road, the uh
Belgian block interlocking, right?
[10:53] » Not Belgian block. The the these are
just blue stone flush pavers that
[10:58] » So, you're increasing the impervious
surface.
[11:00] » No, we're not. They're going to be set
in sand and they're exactly the same as
[11:04] » because there is still a storm water
runoff problem onto 174
[11:09] » and this will also be set in sand. This
will be set in sand.
[11:12] » Good.
>> That's actually mandated by aka
[11:15] » this one. AKA made that recommendation
>> and the storm water runoff issue. are
[11:19] rough that that would be a Stevens which
is maybe not Stevens anymore but that
[11:22] that that's an engineering issue that
they
[11:25] » set up and and I think the biggest thing
just not germanine to this project
[11:30] » but the reality is it is as Aaron said
it's it's a civil issue at this point
[11:35] where it is if the system fails to meet
engineering standards that's your
[11:39] recourse. Well, um
I was hoping you could somehow mitigate
[11:48] it's it's a it's a different issue.
There is still a storm water runoff
[11:52] issue. That's another thing to discuss
at some other time. Um my second point
[11:58] is it would be an opportune time now to
before you allow a modification to fix
[12:06] the invasive species problem.
>> Oh, where's that? You remember we talked
[12:10] about this for a couple years. I agree
it was a win-win and you said so too by
[12:17] um they actually have a deed restriction
filed with the land records that they're
[12:21] going to remove the invasive species on
the riparian buffer next to the fence. I
[12:27] measured it. Aaron uh and I talked about
it. She wasn't quite sure how much of
[12:32] the land uh general's residence was
responsible for. It's about 15,000
[12:37] square ft. So it's almost half an acre
and it's been uh nearly 2 years since
[12:43] that uh requirement was made by you uh
in return for giving up that dreaded
[12:49] bench. Remember it gave up the
>> can I actually that uh invasive species
[12:55] thing was actually part of the original
discussions 5 years ago
[12:59] » right I know when no
with me and the idea was it would
[13:06] actually um you know that that that was
part of well maybe not written but that
[13:11] was part of the understanding
>> right it is written now there's a deed
[13:13] restriction that you demanded because
it was unclear how committed they needed
[13:21] to be to remove all the invasive
species. And the point was to maintain
[13:26] the visual line of sight
>> for Fence Creek because you have a
[13:32] nonwater dependent
project and DEP wanted and that was
[13:39] public access to maintain the view. So
it's been almost two years. I go by it
[13:43] every day. It's gotten worse, not
better.
[13:47] Let me just finish on this. The
fragmmites now has invaded up into the
[13:52] native plant riparian buffer which is
almost non-existent.
[13:55] » We now have mud wart in there and and we
also have Japanese nodweed and tree of
[14:01] heaven. Now to Aaron's credit, I spoke
with her last summer about this
[14:07] and I also I also emailed her three
times this summer. So I know she's well
[14:12] I know you're on top of it, Aaron. So,
it seems like a good opportunity to get
[14:18] the homeowners association to at least
work on what they are required by law to
[14:23] do, which is remove invasive species in
perpetuity. I have the exact writing
[14:29] from November 2024. How could you
forget? We spent six meetings on it. So,
[14:36] am I in fa speaking in favor of this?
I'm in favor of this application with
[14:40] conditions that you somehow get the
invasive removal project moving forward.
[14:46] And if it's not moving forward, Aaron,
go you've been out there. You haven't
[14:51] been out there yet. You know, it is we
don't want to be you don't want to be
[14:54] mean, but it's a violation. It's a
violation. It's been 2 years. So, it's a
[15:00] good opportunity to
you hate to approve a change when
[15:04] there's an outstanding issue. Right.
Now's a good time to talk about it and
[15:11] clear it up because it's been two years
and it's getting worse, not better.
[15:17] You ask your question because cuz I
drive by I live across the street,
[15:20] right? So So I drive by there every day.
So So I had seen the um I'd seen
[15:25] fragmitees get big, but you're saying
all the other stuff's coming in, too.
[15:29] » Unfortunately, there was a nice strip of
native plants planted there. They're
[15:33] almost overwhelmed now. It's getting
worse. Yeah,
[15:38] » they there was some brush hoging done I
think in winter last year. You can't
[15:42] brush hot f mighty excuse me.
Additionally, I noticed today there are
[15:46] three new non-native evergreen trees
planted right there.
[15:51] I mean that must be a planting plan. I'm
surprised you somebody would put three
[15:56] non-native
trees
[16:00] right there in
>> there was there was one long time ago.
[16:04] Yeah, but they they planted three trees
there recently when they did that little
[16:07] thing down there.
>> Yeah. So anyway, I'm not as concerned
[16:11] about that, but the view is not there.
And the commitment to maintain invasive
[16:15] species removal, we make sure it was
written in perpetuity and that is is a D
[16:22] recorded with the M town of Madison land
records. So I don't want to be too
[16:27] strict about it, but can we follow up on
that, please? Because they they agreed
[16:32] to do it.
Did you want to respond to me at all?
[16:35] » No, I I'm no responsibility for that,
but I do know I do know the HOA a little
[16:39] bit and the HOA is is I think has had a
change of leadership in the last year as
[16:44] I understand it. And I think the idea
that maybe even if you just met with the
[16:48] with them, they would they me actually
the planning zoning commission. It's
[16:52] you're required by law to make sure
these conditions are met.
[16:55] » Well, then I think I'm happy to meet as
a friend,
[16:58] » but it's your legal responsibility.
Would that be a zoning enforcement
[17:03] officer issue?
>> Office has received a written complaint
[17:07] from Jim and has been informed that our
zoning officer would investigate a
[17:13] complaint and from children.
>> Good.
[17:15] » Independent.
>> I I hear I hear your point about
[17:18] connecting the two, but it it's not
really related to this application
[17:22] » except I don't I'm not I'm not a town
attorney. I don't think you can approve
[17:26] something if there's an outstanding
issue.
[17:29] There's an alleged
violation. There is no enforcement
[17:35] action that is underway currently.
>> I mean, you've had I've notified you
[17:41] four times for this. You haven't gone
out there yet. I mean,
[17:44] » I am not the inspector and
>> should be
[17:48] » should be a violation. Doesn't have to
be a mean violation, but someone's got
[17:52] to tell the HOA, you said you do this
and you were bound to do it by law.
[17:59] Okay, thanks. You're on the record here
for saying that. And um I think going
[18:05] back to the application,
the non-native and the invasive species
[18:10] aren't really impacting this portion of
the site for this application.
[18:17] So I think um
did we
[18:22] » Yeah, thank you. Um good evening Carol,
Missouri
[18:27] Road. I also have a big opportunity duo
and work with him at the time that this
[18:33] general's residence was underway. One of
the things that also is related to this
[18:38] whole issue of how things get built and
as well as how they how the PNC improved
[18:45] it was that there buffer to prevent the
housing from just the the built
[18:55] environment affecting the uh the
creeping. And that also was uh written
[19:01] out in a letter by John Cunningham. It
was part of the au buffalo placed and
[19:07] I'm sure Done remembers that.
>> Oh yeah.
[19:10] » Um
>> and actually my memory is this person my
[19:13] memory was they did do some of that
native planting in the first year. They
[19:17] did actually do a whole bunch of native
plant the first year and I think what I
[19:21] now showing this I think the invasive
stuff is done when invasive stuff does
[19:25] which is it takes over the non-invasive
stuff. Well, I I think you're right and
[19:29] that's why I'm raising it because it's
just related and I think you should just
[19:32] know the whole story that our
expectation and what Cunningham
[19:36] outlined, right? And I think we're in
drawings as I recall that there would be
[19:41] native trees and shrubs.
>> That was in Steven's drawings. But yes,
[19:44] it was in there.
>> Steven's drawings.
[19:46] » And it was in there.
>> And it was in there that there would be
[19:48] native plantings so that those of us
that look at the general residence halls
[19:54] every day don't see all the light of the
built environment. And many of us feel
[19:59] as though
etc. So I think there's a lot of
[20:04] literature to support the idea that the
natural environment is important for the
[20:09] creek and as a consequence of that I
think that what has to also be taken
[20:15] into consideration is this issue of what
was originally approved by the community
[20:21] and again I had sent this letter to Erin
about a month ago I know she's very busy
[20:28] but it's also tied into this whole
notion of we're just building and going
[20:33] further, but we're not dealing with the
fundamentals. And fundamentals are
[20:37] really important to those of us that
live right across the creek and that we
[20:41] see it every day.
>> A question.
[20:44] » Um, I hear you and I understand your
your concerns. I'm trying to understand
[20:48] where our scope is involved here so that
we can make an appropriate determination
[20:54] and consider the request accordingly.
What I'm hearing is that the owners of
[21:00] this particular condominium unit are
asking for some improvements.
[21:05] » That's all.
>> So there's the ownership of the
[21:07] individual condominium asking for
improvements to their property.
[21:11] » That's correct.
>> Which is in fact a part of a condominium
[21:15] association
which then has obligations
[21:21] to in fact uphold the development of the
payment. So I the way I'm hearing it is
[21:28] there's there's two separate issues at
hand here. And while I understand your
[21:32] concerns, I don't I don't know how we as
a planning and zoning would tie those
[21:36] two things together. And I don't know
that that the lack of action on one part
[21:43] would have an impact on the relative
action of the other
[21:47] » one on one owner
>> or the enforcement of the conditions
[21:51] that were set. Right? So obviously
>> don't impact this application
[21:57] » and we're not enforcers,
>> but that's why public hearings.
[22:02] » Exactly. It's our only chance to say it.
I can send emails to people all day
[22:06] long.
>> Yeah.
[22:08] » A public hearing. It's a marriage.
>> Trust me.
[22:11] » Yeah. Yeah. No, I think I think that's
well said and agreed and I don't think
[22:16] you're hearing a real objection to an
audience per se. I think what you're
[22:20] hearing is concern that there's a
poorest environment there that that were
[22:25] outlined because part of PNZ original
approval was that all of the driveways
[22:32] and all would be forest material. It's
all black asphalt,
[22:36] » but that wasn't final application
>> that but but that came after it wasn't
[22:41] in the final. the final navigation did
did actually have all the asphalt and
[22:44] what they did was they calculated all
the runoff from that in their design of
[22:49] the groundwater system. So that changed
the capacity of the groundwater system
[22:52] to be larger than it was with the with
Billy's thing which was which was just
[22:57] gravel and so that made it more
expensive and then the question is is
[23:01] the design effective or not and that's
the next level. So
[23:04] » I I remember it slightly differently and
we can work it out together at some
[23:08] point. But the larger point is I think
you understand quite well the
[23:11] frustration with seeing the environment
really change. Not really thinking that
[23:16] the owners are at fault necessarily for
all these things because I don't think
[23:22] they knew.
>> That's correct.
[23:23] » And I didn't think I don't think they
knew what was agreed to. And I don't
[23:28] think we heard that. We heard that.
>> Yeah. No, that's actually true. I' I've
[23:31] had to deal with all these units.
>> Yeah.
[23:33] » And I've had to inform people with all
of them and
[23:37] » they're just gaps in information and I
try to do my best.
[23:42] » As a matter of fact, when Mad for Trees,
which is such a great organization
[23:46] trying to plant trees and native trees
in in um in Madison, I suggested to a
[23:51] friend that he asked them if they would
like to have some native trees that they
[23:55] could plant as butter. And um they
responded in saying they're not allowed
[24:00] to to plant them along the Fence Creek,
which is not correct at all. In fact,
[24:06] there were trees there that died because
the roots had been uh removed when they
[24:11] dug down to actually just let me finish.
>> I just want to correct you. They weren't
[24:16] done. The construction didn't damage
them. They all had the the maple plate.
[24:20] » Okay. Well, in any event, we can agree
to disagree, but never mind. The point
[24:24] is, but there's a larger point here, and
that is that I think the folks that live
[24:29] there don't understand that of course
they can plant a buffer there. What they
[24:34] can't do is obscure the view from Boston
Post Road to the Fence Creek, which is
[24:40] Jim's concern that now these these
natives as well as the fragies have
[24:45] grown too high. But but my point is in
support of a larger view of the
[24:50] environment which is simply that the
agreement was that there could be a
[24:55] buffer
>> for the birds for the other animals and
[24:59] so that we don't see this intense light
every night across
[25:03] » and it's it's just really changing the
environment. So that's that's really
[25:08] what it's about. I I'm so glad Dud's
here listening to this too and hopefully
[25:13] carried back a very positive message
that that we don't or I'll speak for
[25:18] myself. I don't think these homeowners
are ignoring things as much as just not
[25:23] knowing.
>> Well, speaking as a neighbor, I didn't
[25:26] quite get what you said and I have no
doubt it's true. I I did I got the fact
[25:30] that the fragmentes came back in because
I got fragmentes on my salt wash.
[25:33] They're there all the time. I didn't
know that all that other crap was coming
[25:36] back into obviously.
>> It's significant. Yeah. Well, that's
[25:40] » the last point is on the plan of
conservation development
[25:44] » interest,
>> right? The PCD that recently approved uh
[25:48] one of the goals is to
uh
[25:53] protect and restore title wetlands. You
were big on that one. So, this kind of
[25:58] fits right into a goal that you all set
for yourself. Yeah. To restore and
[26:04] protect the title wetlands. Remember, it
wasn't that long ago. We appreciate
[26:09] hearing from you. Um, it's on the
record. It's an enforcement issue, not
[26:15] us approving a specific application, but
we hear you.
[26:19] » Thank you. Maybe do encourage the
homeowners to listen to the testimony
[26:24] tonight because that that might
>> I agree, but I also think to be honest
[26:28] really would be good maybe to even get
John will do this do a sitewalk with
[26:33] John Cunningham out there just out there
and look at those invasives and look
[26:37] » I assume there's a plan
>> there is there must have been invasive
[26:41] removal plan
>> there is there is and and and it would
[26:43] be good to get John out there and say
hey if you guys want to do this it
[26:46] involves that and I'm sure that that
because it involves their spending money
[26:49] to do that. No, but they'd have to do
that. I know,
[26:52] » but they don't know what they have to
do, right? That's what I'm saying. I
[26:54] think John would be a better person to
get there.
[26:56] » Yeah, John would be a way to connect the
problem with the solution. So, I'll I'll
[27:01] try to talk to send a note to John and
say, "Hey, can you just go out there and
[27:04] meet with these guys?"
>> That's nice, but it's also up to the
[27:06] zoning enforcement officer.
>> Yes, agree.
[27:09] » What are the What are the consequences
for an infraction of a zoning
[27:12] regulation? When our office receives a
complaint, my zoning officer will go out
[27:18] and investigate that. The way that is
prioritized is based on workload.
[27:22] » Understood.
>> So if if a violation is found, what are
[27:26] the consequences?
>> It depends what it is. I mean, sometimes
[27:30] you can start with a phone call to
someone and communicate with them of
[27:35] what is going on. Um, you know, I I
>> Well, you're allowed to leverage daily
[27:41] fines. I mean, you're not going to do
that in this case, but you're going to
[27:45] you can
>> typically the land use office doesn't
[27:48] start
>> with citations when you receive a
[27:52] complaint or usually the least
>> uh
[27:55] » that that's that's what I was asking and
and maybe you could carry
[27:58] » trying to work with property owners
>> needs to be more mindful of what the
[28:02] regulations are. a complaint has been
filed, there could be repercussions if
[28:07] they are found to be in violation of
their obligations.
[28:12] » Later stages may involve flocking
[laughter]
[28:16] » publicly,
[28:19] but I I but I do actually think that
your desire is their desire. I just
[28:24] don't know if they know how to do it
because I know these people and they and
[28:27] they like me they they hate the problem
is removing invasives is very expensive
[28:34] and time consuming and it can take 10
years and you need an expert to do it.
[28:38] So I'm surprised they agreed to do it
but they wanted to get rid of that
[28:41] dreadful bench that they agreed to do it
and it's expensive and you have to be on
[28:45] top of it for 10 years
>> and I'm happy to talk to them about
[28:52] I'll I'll try to connect you guys. I
mean, I know you're talking so much
[28:55] better than the rest. It's not like
>> Yeah,
[29:00] it's not very we don't have Sorry,
Carol, but the applicant is a good key
[29:06] person here. Nice conduitation.
>> Sadly, I've got a I've got a target on
[29:12] my back. [laughter]
>> All right. Um,
[29:15] » any other questions or comments? Any
other remote?
[29:19] » I'm looking remote. I don't see any
hands up. Do you Erin?
[29:23] No. [laughter]
>> Right. Any other questions you have? No.
[29:29] Based on what we've heard so far.
>> In that case, did I have a motion to
[29:34] close the public hearing and move to
deliberations?
[29:37] » Second.
>> No, sir.
[29:42] » In favor.
>> Okay. Thanks.
[29:45] » Thank you, guys. Thank you. Thank you.
>> I sent this to you based on what they
[29:57] » call
[30:13] it sounds like
[30:19] enforcement officing
[30:33] they filed due process will ensue.
>> Yes.
[30:37] » Okay.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
[30:38] » And it's not related to this
application.
[30:40] » Has no bearing onification.
[30:44] » The elimination. All right. Um
>> motion to approve.
[30:47] » Yeah. Second to approve.
>> Second.
[30:51] Any further discussion?
I think we have a draft.
[30:56] Aaron
want me to make
[31:00] you.
>> Would you like to?
[31:02] » I
[31:06] following draft resolutions offered.
Madison planning and zoning commission
[31:09] approves application 26-32 plus coastal
site plan 908 Boston post road 39 lot 4
[31:16] zone R2 owner applicants Nicholas J and
Nancy J Robert postal site plan
[31:21] application site planation and major
downtown village district
[31:25] modify railway patio walkway per unit
small cluster housing development
[31:30] architectural plan titled Robert 908
Boston room as nin 063
[31:36] G SK dated 720 2020 26 by Dickens
architect. The site plan entitled
[31:42] Blogber 908 Boston Post Road, Madison,
Connecticut 06443.
[31:49] Site plan sheet SK prepared by DOT
architect the following conditions. One,
[31:54] that the zoning enforcement officer be
notified at least 48 hours prior to
[31:58] commencement of any regulating activity.
Two, that any necessary erosion and
[32:02] sedimentation controls be installed
prior to any site disturbance and be
[32:05] maintained in duration of construction
activities and until the site is
[32:08] sufficiently stabilized to the
satisfaction of the zoning enforcement
[32:11] officer. In the event that changes to
the improvement plans are required as a
[32:15] result of other agency permitting to
support the proposed activity planning
[32:19] and zoning commission resource right to
review set changes and may require
[32:22] modification of this. The commission
finds that with the above reference
[32:26] conditions, the proposal is consistent
with all applicable rules and policies
[32:30] of the coastal management act section 15
of the mass zoning regulations. No
[32:34] anticipated impacts to coastal resources
are expected. The effective date of this
[32:38] approval is September 17th, 2026. Any
commission?
[32:45] » Any further discussions?
All in favor to approve
[32:50] unanimous. Thank you everyone.
All right, we have a pending application
[32:56] for 26-15 plus a coastal site plan. This
is Garnet Park Road under applicant the
[33:00] town of Madison. Applications are
coastal site plan review for the
[33:03] replacement of Garn Garnet Park Road
bridge over Bailey Creek
[33:11] representative to present. Kim Fletcher
from Barton and Lois, the engineering
[33:16] firm uh from the town is here to
present. Kim, did you have anyone else
[33:20] on your team that I needed to promote
over?
[33:23] » Uh, I don't think so. I think it's just
me.
[33:26] » Okay. Thanks. And will you be screen
sharing or do you need me to pull up
[33:31] your presentation?
>> Um, is it okay if I share it?
[33:34] » Yeah, sure.
Let's
[33:47] see if I if I can figure out technology.
[33:55] » We all
>> Yeah. All right. Let me
[34:04] Are you seeing that clearly where from
where you're sitting?
[34:09] » Okay.
All right. Um so thank you very much for
[34:14] having me here. Uh my name is Kim
Fletcher. I'm from Barton and Legudas
[34:18] and I've been working um with the town
of Madison uh specifically with Rob
[34:23] Russo on this project for the last few
years. Um, so, uh, this is Garnet Park
[34:30] over Bailey Creek in Madison, of course.
Um, let's please.
[34:37] [clears throat]
[34:42] Come on. Hold on.
[34:56] Oh, there we go. Okay. Um, so, uh, this
is just a picture, quick picture of
[35:01] where we're, uh, what we're talking
about. This is the existing bridge. It's
[35:06] two pipes. I'm going to get a little bit
more into that in a second here. Um, I
[35:10] just want to show you where it's located
first. Um, so it's on Garnet Park, uh, a
[35:17] little bit, um, near Governor's Way, but
this whole section of, uh, roadway, you
[35:23] can't tell based on this, but this is
all, um, a oneway in and out. So, it's a
[35:28] dead end. Uh, so this bridge is serving
that entire community. Um, and so if
[35:33] this bridge fails, then you're
essentially trapping these people um, in
[35:37] their neighborhoods.
This is a aerial of the same. And this
[35:43] is just showing um what we're here to
talk about which is the coastal res
[35:48] resiliency and the coastal plan. And
these are all the title wetlands that
[35:52] are in this area.
[35:57] Oh man.
[36:08] There you go.
>> There we go. All right. I think I
[36:11] finally figured it out. Um, so like I
said, the um existing is a 48 inch and a
[36:18] 60 in um corrugated metal pipe with
concrete wing walls and head walls. Um,
[36:25] it was built in the 1960s
and uh, as I said, it it carries uh,
[36:31] Garnet Park over Bailey Creek. It's
tightly influenced.
[36:36] Um, it's currently 47 feet long from end
of pipe to end of pipe with a skew of 20
[36:42] degrees.
[36:46] And this is a picture of the inside of
the pipe. So, um, we crawled through it
[36:51] and and we continue to crawl through it
uh, every year or so just to make sure
[36:55] that it's not changing um, while we're
going through the design and permitting
[36:58] process. But the the pipe has failed and
we're seeing some roadway fill um coming
[37:05] through. Uh luckily a lot of that fill
is um a stone-like material, so it's not
[37:12] it's not freely flowing out from over
the pipe. Um but it is a concern again,
[37:18] especially with this being um the only
bridge that's carrying traffic in and
[37:22] out of this neighborhood.
[37:27] This is looking at it from the top. Um,
looking north over the bridge and then
[37:31] looking south. The pavement is in uh
really good shape. So, we don't see any
[37:36] movement of the actual pavement which
tells us that um the structure is stable
[37:41] right now. So, we're not seeing any
movement of that pipe. Um although it's
[37:46] failed, we don't see any continuous
movement which is good. Um it is an
[37:50] existing buminous overlay and the
roadway width is uh 19 and a half and
[37:57] has approximately 600 cars a day.
[38:04] So the existing hydraulics and the
existing conditions as you can see
[38:08] there's a lot of um there's a lot of
tidal wetlands on either side of the
[38:12] bridge. Um there's a drainage area of uh
0.55 square miles and it has an existing
[38:20] freeboard um of 2.32 and that's using
the 50-year riverine storm with a
[38:26] one-year title surge. Um it has a
100redyear discharge of 130 cfs.
[38:38] Uh so I' I've put the regulatory limits
on the top right there. So we have the
[38:43] high tide line at 2.65 and the coastal
jurisdictional line at 3.7 and mean high
[38:49] water at 2.23.
Um and that will come into play in a
[38:53] couple slides. But um just a little bit
more. So, we had uh wetland scientists
[38:58] come out and mark out all the flags and
uh give us a report of what we're
[39:02] looking at for species and plant type.
Um most of the plants I can't pronounce,
[39:09] but I have listed them there. um
wildlife uh you know the heron uh
[39:16] muskrats, raccoons, crabs um and we've
gone through the IPAC and NDB process to
[39:23] ensure that we have no effect or we're
making sure that we're doing our work
[39:28] within the right um timelines to
minimize any impacts to these species.
[39:38] So how are we going to fix it? So we
have um proposed a 15 by7 box coververt
[39:48] um with one foot of stream bed embedment
and we've sized it for again the 50-year
[39:54] riverine flood with a one-year title and
the Army Corps and deep regulation
[39:58] requires a 1 foot of freeboard um but
when we took a look at the Madison
[40:03] coastal resiliency plan that recommended
24 in of freeboard and so we designed to
[40:10] ensure sure that we were meeting that 24
in freeboard.
[40:15] Um and and also here uh so I had
mentioned that the pipes were around 47
[40:21] ft long. Um we've shortened the
structure to um uh 28 ft uh
[40:27] perpendicular. And so the wing walls are
going to run um parallel to the road.
[40:32] And there'll be bridge rail right on the
um on the shoulder of the road to get as
[40:37] much of that structure um out of the
water course and the wetlands that we
[40:41] could.
[40:47] So here's looking at just the the covert
section and then the culvert elevation.
[40:53] Um as I said it's a a 15t span. It's got
a slight skew. So you see the clear span
[40:59] there and it says 15 and some change but
that's just because you're you're
[41:03] looking at it on a skew. Um
and
[41:08] uh additionally we which I'm not showing
here but we're going to have an
[41:14] additional um mud mat under under the
bottom slab of one foot of uh concrete.
[41:21] And that's to ensure that we don't uh
introduce any kind of scour concern. Um,
[41:27] traditionally box you don't look at
scour um just because the nature of what
[41:32] the structure is, but we just with it
being a title uh area, we just wanted to
[41:37] ensure that, you know, we had adequate
um scour protection for the future. Uh
[41:43] and additionally, we also sized this box
covert structurally so that we could in
[41:48] the future raise the road almost 2 feet
and we wouldn't need to redesign the
[41:53] box. It could take the extra weight um
of the roadway if in the future we need
[41:58] to raise the road just due to increased
storms and overt topping and things like
[42:03] that.
[42:08] » Um so just to summarize it's it's a
little easier to see because of this one
[42:12] uh with the colors is the orange is the
uh box cover and the wing walls. The
[42:18] yellow is the roadway reconstruction.
Um, so we try to limit the roadway
[42:22] reconstruction to just what is necessary
to tie it back in. Um, and with the
[42:27] existing roadway being like 19 and a
half and us um, extending this to a 24
[42:34] foot roadway to meet design um,
requirement or I'm sorry, it's 22 foot
[42:39] roadway with shoulders on either side.
So that's why it shows 24 on that
[42:43] drawing, but it's um 22 feet for um
driving purposes. And that is um due to
[42:50] design requirements through Connecticut
um DOT and AASHTO.
[42:58] Um and I'm I'm going to explain the
water handling because it it has a lot
[43:02] to do with the impacts. Um again because
this area is uh one way in and out, we
[43:10] have no option other than to stage
construction so that we can maintain at
[43:15] least alternating one-way traffic in and
out. Um so that did add a little bit to
[43:20] our temporary impacts. Um, so during
stage one, we'll be removing half of the
[43:29] pipe and installing uh installing the
box section there while we uh shift
[43:34] traffic to the west and allow um
alternating one way. Once we have that
[43:41] first portion of box in, we'll switch
and that's what stage two is. And we'll
[43:45] allow traffic alternating one way on
that um eastern side while we build the
[43:51] western portion of it. And then for our
third um that would just be installing
[43:56] that last piece of guide rail that we
couldn't get to um because the coffer
[44:01] dam and and things were in the way
during the stage one and two.
[44:05] » This should be my question. [laughter]
[44:11] » So now how are we going to protect
everything? Um so we've had um an inter
[44:18] agency meeting with Army Corps and DEP
um and we have reviewed the project with
[44:24] them um over the course of the last two
years um and we've come to a plan that I
[44:31] think everybody has um that everybody
feels comfortable with. So it's three
[44:38] three kind of boxes. So, we're trying to
avoid um as much impact as we possibly
[44:44] can. Um we're maintaining all of our
inundation limits. So, what gets wet now
[44:52] during these um changing tides will
still get wet after the new box. So,
[44:57] we're not going to be drying up any
wetlands.
[45:00] um we're maintaining the same um
drainage patterns uh that are existing
[45:06] now and uh avoiding any future uh title
wetland impacts where feasible. Um where
[45:14] we can't help it, we're trying to
minimize it. So there are limited
[45:18] wetland and water course disturbances
associated again with the um temporary
[45:23] condition where we're doing construction
and we'll be installing sheeting which
[45:29] will temporarily impact um the wetlands.
Uh but we we tried to limit that
[45:35] construction footprint as much as we
could while maintaining traffic. Um and
[45:40] then also provide
um additional freeboard where we could
[45:45] to help with any sort of future flooding
events. And then lastly, where we we we
[45:52] couldn't prevent any, we are going to
mitigate. And so ultimately we end up
[45:57] with approximately 185 square ft of
permanent impacts. And um when we spoke
[46:04] with deep they thought that this would
be a good location for plant trans uh
[46:10] title plant transllocation.
Um and so we have hired um Davidson
[46:16] Environmental and he is um he's putting
together the final package for the
[46:22] transllocation plan. Um and that will
include a minimum of three years of
[46:27] monitoring to ensure that it's
established. Um I I think and then after
[46:32] that the contract shows just a like a an
hourly rate. So if at 3 years it hasn't
[46:39] established, he'll continue monitoring
um and giving recommendations
[46:44] until we have a reestablished wetland.
[46:53] Um and so this one kind of lays out what
those impacts are. Um so we have a total
[46:59] wetland wetland impact of 535 square ft.
360 of that is the temporary wetland
[47:07] impact. Um, which is from either
removing the existing pipes, uh, work
[47:14] within the coffer dam. Um,
[47:19] yeah, pulling and installing and
removing sheet piling, removing the
[47:24] existing structure because we have to
extend the sheet piling out a little
[47:28] further than the extents of our new
structure because we have to get the old
[47:32] one out. Um, and then from a permanent
wetland impact, we have about 175 square
[47:38] feet. Sorry, I said 185 175. Um, but
we're cutting that down to below mean
[47:45] high water. So, the areas that were
having permanent wetland impacts, we are
[47:49] creating a water course and then we're
still going to do a onetoone mitigation
[47:55] with the transllocation to reestablish
that wetland area.
[48:02] Um, from a water course uh standpoint,
we have uh 1,070 square feet and that's
[48:09] all temporary. We don't have any
permanent wetland impact or water course
[48:13] impact. Um, it's all temporary during
construction and we're actually creating
[48:19] um water course because the areas where
you used to have a pipe and fill between
[48:24] those pipes, that's all going to be
water course now.
[48:29] Um and there's no vegetated shallows
within the project limits our um wetland
[48:34] scientist
[48:38] um
described. So uh this is kind of what I
[48:43] just said. We're create uh
we're creating eight uh we're creating
[48:49] 835 square feet of wetland water course
from the existing upland review area. So
[48:54] that again is because we're bringing the
bridge in to um in closer to the
[49:01] roadway. So instead of it extending out
that uh 47 ft and now we're only at 26,
[49:07] there's an area that was um either pipe
or roadway fill that now is going to be
[49:12] water course. Um the areas of the
current wetlands that is going to be
[49:16] dropped below the mean high water that
will be water course. Um
[49:22] and sorry I think I'm repeating myself
but yes. Okay. And then hydraulic and
[49:29] flood plane. Um this is the FEMA flood
map. Um we are not filling within the
[49:34] flood plane. It's a minor cut in the
area.
[49:43] Here's the um hydraulic information. So
um obviously the same drainage area.
[49:48] We'll have the same flow rate. The
velocities are very slow 38. Um just the
[49:53] tide coming in and the tide going out.
Uh the water surface elevation between
[49:58] the existing and the proposed um is
remaining the same. Um and we're meeting
[50:03] the freeboard requirement of that 24 in
with some uh some buffer there.
[50:16] Um, so this is just kind of a snapshot
of all the environmental and species
[50:21] considerations that we looked at. We ran
through all of the requirements of the
[50:25] Army Corps and deep um permits to ensure
that we're not negatively impacting any
[50:30] of the species uh whether it be federal
or state um and ensuring that we're
[50:35] working with all the time of year
restrictions in order to um minimize any
[50:39] impacts to those um to those species.
[50:45] And um so this again I I kind of already
went over this but it's going to be one
[50:50] to one. Um the the way it'll work is
that Davidson right now he is um
[50:56] currently determining which plants that
he feels have the um basically the best
[51:02] chance of a transllocation
um being successful. uh and he's
[51:08] providing to us a set of plans that
we'll include in our um bid package
[51:14] which outlines to the contractor that
this transllocation has to happen prior
[51:19] to construction. So that way um these
plants are not impacted by the
[51:25] construction that's happening around
them. Um and that will be handled both
[51:29] with uh plans and also special
provisions that will be included in the
[51:34] in the package. Um and and again, he'll
be monitoring this for at least three
[51:38] years to ensure that um these plants
live and are thriving. And if they're
[51:43] not, that he would make recommendations
in in what to do next. and and within
[51:48] that within the plans um if if the
plants die so like if he monitors them
[51:56] for two years let's say and then he goes
back and he's like these wetland plants
[52:00] that we have um that we transllocated
didn't live at that point that 175 that
[52:07] we're doing a onetoone
um uh mitigation for would then become a
[52:13] 3 to one. So at that point we would be
mitigating um by planting new wetland
[52:20] um somewhere else to to um account for
that loss of wetlands
[52:26] » to remedy situation.
>> I'm sorry
[52:30] » to remedy the situation.
>> Yes, exactly.
[52:36] Um and so tonight, um I wanted to talk
through with you, you know, our coastal
[52:41] site plan, um for any of the questions
or comments that you have. Um
[52:46] additionally, we'll be um seeking
approvals through local flood
[52:50] management. Um we already have our
permit um in process with Army Corps and
[52:55] Deep and we've had continued
conversations with them. um this piece,
[53:00] this transllocation piece was the last
piece of it. And so they're continuing
[53:04] to review um and we uh will be providing
them with Davidson's report once we
[53:11] receive it. Um and then they'll be able
to um uh finalize that review. But um
[53:18] from all of our conversations, that was
that was the last piece to the puzzle.
[53:25] Um and then just quickly, so the project
schedule, uh we hope to put this out to
[53:30] bid by the end of this year. Um that
that pipe is in bad shape. It's really
[53:35] important that we get this thing
replaced so that we make sure that we
[53:38] have um adequate um roadway for those uh
people that live in that neighborhood.
[53:45] Um we are getting funding through the
state local bridge program. Uh, so they
[53:51] pay 50% of engineering, construction,
and inspection. Um, and so, you know,
[53:57] the the state reviews all plans and
specs prior to going out to bid as well.
[54:03] Um, and so everything that we just kind
of talked about is listed here. Um, but
[54:09] I'm happy to answer any questions or
anything that I've missed. Um, thank you
[54:13] very much for for allowing me to come
and talk with you guys.
[54:18] » Thank you, Kim. Thanks, Kim. Um, anyone
have questions since that's me?
[54:24] » I have a silly one. Um, how was the
failing culbert first discovered?
[54:30] » Um, so a lot we get hired a lot to look
at, um, bridges that are under 20 ft
[54:37] because anything over 20 feet is
inspected by the state every two years,
[54:41] but towns are responsible for inspecting
bridges under 20 feet. Um and so when we
[54:47] were looking at some of the other
structures in town, um that one was
[54:51] flagged.
[54:54] » Good.
>> Kim, um I saw that fragmitees was listed
[54:58] on your list of species plant species in
the area. So will you be able to get rid
[55:02] of that? I mean, are you could that be a
goal is to get rid of some of the
[55:06] invasives while you're
>> Yes, thank you for mentioning that. I
[55:11] wrote that down and then I didn't say
it. Um, uh, part of the spec package is
[55:16] that we are removing any of the invasive
species in the area as well.
[55:21] » Great. Good. Super.
>> And then I had a question about the new
[55:24] um,
culvert that you're putting in, how far
[55:29] down into the muck do you have to go?
[laughter]
[55:33] » Um, so [clears throat] for the like
permit requirements, you have to go at
[55:37] least one foot. So, we're gonna we're
gonna place the bottom of the culvert on
[55:42] top of what we call a mud mat because
the soils there are basically muck. And
[55:45] so, we're going to be removing about two
feet of that muck and then back filling
[55:49] with like a like a granular material to
place the the box cover on top of so
[55:55] that it doesn't um so it has good
bearing area.
[55:59] » And I saw that you had hermit crabs and
blue crabs listed. Are there muscles and
[56:03] oysters in there at all or are we too
far up river? Maybe
[56:07] » they uh they were not listed within um
any of the research we did or the um
[56:17] biologists that we uh hired.
>> Okay. Yeah, they would they would have
[56:22] listed I think if they saw them. Thanks.
Thank you.
[56:26] » Any other questions?
[56:30] What is floorboard
mentioned?
[56:32] » Floorboard. Yep. Freeboard. Oh, sorry.
Freeboard. freeboard.
[56:36] » Oh, freeboard. Um, that is for uh it's
from your water surface elevation for
[56:42] your storm that you're designing for to
the roadway surface.
[56:48] » Oh, is it two feet?
>> Yes.
[56:54] » Can we kayak through it at low tide?
[laughter]
[56:58] » You might be able to.
>> I can't I grew up in the on that salt
[57:04] mar so I couldn't resist. I know it
really quick. It's like the branch that
[57:07] goes out the neck river. That's
>> right.
[57:09] » Yeah, you must know it, too.
>> Um Okay. Thanks. Thanks for the all this
[57:14] information.
>> Yeah, I think the town has had um three
[57:19] bridge replacements over the last few
years and um all of them have gone
[57:23] through inland wetlands um but none of
those have been within a coastal zone.
[57:28] So um now you have gotten a a full
project description and and land
[57:35] » and you get to work with process deep do
I mean all these sort of levels of of
[57:42] governance and agencies
>> and and typically in situations like
[57:46] that where there's federal and state
permitting the the local takes a a
[57:52] backseat to that permitting. Um which is
why we've sort of pushed this
[57:57] application and along for several months
here through your statutory limits to
[58:02] allow um the engineers to get to a point
where they feel they're going to have if
[58:08] any very little modifications to the
design so that they wouldn't have to
[58:12] come back to you. Right. And I think old
Sabbrook right now has just had to
[58:17] they've just admitted that they have to
replace a bridge that they just put in a
[58:21] year ago. I don't know if any of you saw
that. They didn't get it high enough.
[58:24] So, I'm glad to hear that you're going a
little extra high um to accommodate, you
[58:30] know, sea level rise and whatever. Or
that the road also can be raised without
[58:34] having to disrupt everything underneath.
>> That's right.
[58:37] » Because um you know, if the previous one
lasted since the 60s, then are you
[58:41] projecting how long this will last?
>> They're designed to last 75 to 100
[58:46] years.
So we might have higher segment. That
[58:51] might be a different kind of marsh in
100 years like underwater.
[58:56] » All right.
Thank you. Um.
[58:58] » Yes.
>> Would someone like to make a motion to
[59:01] approve? We have a draft resolution.
[59:06] » Thank you, Michelle.
>> Second.
[59:07] » Do you want to read it then? [laughter]
>> Why not, John?
[59:12] » Thank you, John.
>> The following draft resolution is
[59:14] offered. The Madison Planning and Zoning
Commission approves application number
[59:19] 26-15
plus CSP Garnet Park Road owner
[59:24] applicant town of Madison. Application
for a coastal state plan review for the
[59:29] replacement of the Garnet Park Road
bridge over Bailey Creek as shown
[59:33] application materials with the following
conditions. One, that the zoning
[59:37] enforcement officer be notified at least
48 hours prior to the commencement of
[59:41] any regulated activity.
Two, that all erosion and sedimentation
[59:47] controls be installed prior to any site
disturbance and be maintained for the
[59:51] duration of construction activities and
until a site is sufficiently stabilized
[59:55] to the satisfaction of a zoning
enforcement officer. In the event that
[1:00:00] changes to the approved plans are
required as a result of other agency
[1:00:03] permitting to support the proposed
activity, the Madison planning and
[1:00:06] zoning commission reserves the right to
review said changes and may require
[1:00:11] modification and disapproval.
The commission finds that with the above
[1:00:16] reference conditions, including those
imposed by state and f federal
[1:00:20] regulations,
proposal is consistent with all
[1:00:23] applicable goals and policies in the
coastal management act and section 15 of
[1:00:28] the Madison zoning regulations. The
effective date of this approval is
[1:00:32] September 17th, 2026.
Second,
[1:00:39] any further discussion in favor? Very
well done.
[1:00:44] » It's approved. Good luck. Can't wait to
have it.
[1:00:46] » Thank you guys so much. I appreciate it.
>> Thank you.
[1:00:52] » All right. Next on the agenda, we have
um 26-33 plus coastal site plan for 1321
[1:00:59] Boston Post Road. This is a M um map 31,
lot 32,
[1:01:05] zone C, owner applicant JL Bore LLC.
application for minor site plan
[1:01:10] modification and coastal site plan to
install EV chargers in the parking lot.
[1:01:15] Do we have Yes. So, I wasn't sure if we
were going to be moving forward this
[1:01:19] evening, but I do see that Chelsea is
here um
[1:01:24] uh I believe for um the application. Um
let me just
[1:01:31] confirm. Um this is typically uh EV
chargers are considered a minor site
[1:01:37] plan modification. um would go to uh AKA
for review as required by the
[1:01:45] regulations. Um in this case um they did
uh go before AKA at their August meeting
[1:01:52] and um
AKA had no comments. They're standard
[1:01:58] chargers.
>> Yeah, standard pedestal. Um there's a
[1:02:02] pedestal in the front of the property.
This is the existing vet office next to
[1:02:06] the Dunkin Donuts on Post Road. And then
another one in the back parking area for
[1:02:10] cats and dogs.
>> Um yes, one for cat owners.
[1:02:16] » No, I think one's for employees, one's
for um
[1:02:19] » uh guests. The um the only reason it's
before you is because a site plan
[1:02:24] modification triggers a coastal site
plan application. Um clearly there are
[1:02:29] no coastal uh impacts associated with
this application. Um the only coastal
[1:02:36] resources present on the site um if
you're familiar with the location are
[1:02:41] the standard general resources that
apply to every single property within
[1:02:46] the coastal zone.
>> This is precious across from the Dunk
[1:02:49] McDonald's.
>> It's next to the dump.
[1:02:51] » Yeah, it's they share that access
driveway. Um so there's very little
[1:02:56] excavation um you know associated with
digging out those. Um, so I did um draft
[1:03:03] a a general uh resolution here um for
you that I'm happy to share. Um
[1:03:11] I don't know if does the commission have
any questions? This is such a
[1:03:15] » minor basic
>> application. I'm not sure it
[1:03:19] » requires boilerplate approval language
because we can just read one of the ones
[1:03:22] we got and swap out the the name.
>> Yep. I'll just I I just am screen
[1:03:26] sharing it for you right now. Um
>> and not Are these fast chargers or
[1:03:32] » I think they are fast. Yeah.
>> Are they free?
[1:03:36] » I don't think anything's free.
>> They they gave in the packet of of
[1:03:41] information they showed
gave us.
[1:03:47] » Anyone read that?
>> Are you close enough to read?
[1:03:52] » Sure.
>> Thank you. While Madison Planning Zoning
[1:03:56] Commission approves application of the
26-33
[1:04:00] Boston Coastal site plan 1321 Boston
Post Road map 31 lot 32 zone C owner
[1:04:09] applicant JL LLC application for minor
site plan modifications in coastal site
[1:04:16] plan installed EV chargers in parking
lot as shown on application documents
[1:04:22] the following conditions. One, that the
zoning enforcement officer be notified
[1:04:25] at least 48 hours prior to the
commencement of any regulated activity.
[1:04:30] Two, that any necessary erosion and
sedimentation controls installed prior
[1:04:33] to any site disturbance and be
maintained for the duration of
[1:04:36] construction activities and until the
site sufficiently stabilized
[1:04:40] satisfaction zoning enforcement officer.
the event that changes to the improved
[1:04:44] plans are required as a result of
weather agency permitting to support the
[1:04:49] proposed activity. Madison planning and
zoning commission reserves the right to
[1:04:52] review said changes and may require
modifications modification of this
[1:04:58] approval.
Bishop finds that but with the above
[1:05:02] reference conditions proposal is
consistent with all topical goals and
[1:05:06] policies coastal management act in
section 15 of mask and zoning
[1:05:12] regulations. No anticipated acts to
coastal resources are expected. The
[1:05:17] effective date of this approval is
September 17th 2026.
[1:05:22] » Second
m further discussion. All in favor?
[1:05:30] » Thank you everybody.
>> Thanks for explaining that.
[1:05:35] » Oh,
>> next on the agenda 26-34
[1:05:38] plus coastal site plan for 19 Advent
Hill Road. Um they've I think we're
[1:05:44] going to
>> reschedule. So, if I could have a motion
[1:05:47] to reschedu this was it was schedumber
17th, but we'd like to move the public
[1:05:54] hearing to October 1st.
>> Motion.
[1:05:58] » Thank you. Second.
Any further discussion? All in favor?
[1:06:03] So, that will get put on the agenda for
October 1st. Okay. Then phone 6-29 um
[1:06:09] plus Coastal Sydney for Mill Road. Um,
this was the one that was opened on
[1:06:14] September 17th and continued, I'm sorry,
opened in August and continued to
[1:06:19] September 17th. And we saw that there
was quite a turnout. And the question is
[1:06:24] now um that I wanted to discuss with
everybody and take a vote on it was what
[1:06:29] should we do? I had said that we would
find a larger space to accommodate the
[1:06:34] public. Um, turns out I think the only
option might be Neck River Elementary
[1:06:39] School. Um Erin, you're not keen on a
new place for a big for you know a
[1:06:46] public hearing that
>> how much more can you get in over there?
[1:06:50] » That room is not available.
>> Awesome.
[1:06:52] » Yeah. So and so the question is should
we go to all Zoom? I prefer not to do
[1:06:58] that because I have trouble seeing.
>> I should not do
[1:07:01] » um and I also feel that it is important
to listen to people. So I just wanted to
[1:07:06] get a sense um it would be easier to do
Zoom for sure
[1:07:11] is better. Erin, do you want to add some
more pluses of from Zoom versus
[1:07:16] » Sure.
>> trying to figure out what it
[1:07:18] » given the fact that uh there was a
turnout at the last meeting. This room
[1:07:22] has limited capacity.
>> Correct.
[1:07:24] » Uh there's limited uh meeting rooms
available uh with hybrid capacity due to
[1:07:30] construction projects within the school.
this room next door uh meeting room C is
[1:07:35] not available. Um experience that we
have had in sharing even if the room was
[1:07:41] available in sharing overflow rooms and
things like that. Um you always have to
[1:07:47] consider when there's an application
with opposition the potential for
[1:07:51] appeal, the potential for having
accurate transcripts, having everyone be
[1:07:57] able to be heard to see. Um, we have one
screen here in this room that's
[1:08:02] available for viewing for folks in
person. It was my recommendation that
[1:08:07] the um meeting be moved to entirely Zoom
to uh best accommodate everyone um for
[1:08:16] visibility and hearing and um Carol
expressed concern um about being able to
[1:08:23] see on a smaller screen. Um there are
individual accommodations for
[1:08:27] commissioners and any member of the
public. Um if there are uh you know a
[1:08:34] need for a larger screen or no access to
a computer, things like that, those
[1:08:39] opportunities are always available. Um,
Carol did uh request that we have
[1:08:46] consultation from our town attorney um
which was done yesterday and um uh
[1:08:52] Carrie Olsen did as well recommend uh
the Zoom format entirely. Um but Carol u
[1:08:59] today requested that we bring this to
the commission um and open the agenda uh
[1:09:05] for the commission to vote on this. Um,
I think this is somewhat unique as the
[1:09:11] commission has in my history at least,
um, never voted on a venue or a location
[1:09:18] for a meeting. Um, it's a little unusual
and, um, I just wanted to be able to at
[1:09:24] least share uh, at least the background
of that. As Carol mentioned, Neck River
[1:09:30] um, elementary school is uh, does have
an open cafe
[1:09:35] uh, setting. There have been public
information sessions there. Um the
[1:09:40] planning and zoning commission has never
had a meeting there. Um the capabilities
[1:09:46] of it are not fully determined at this
point. If the commission decides to uh
[1:09:53] vote to hold the meeting there um and
there isn't time to do practice runs um
[1:10:00] to do that either. The room is not
available until 6:30 the evening of the
[1:10:05] meeting. Um so at 6:30 in the evening uh
200 chairs would have to be assembled
[1:10:11] and it would have to be made available
um so that the meeting could begin at
[1:10:17] 7:00.
>> That's new information for me too. So
[1:10:20] » well I had I had to look for some of
that information this afternoon after
[1:10:24] your
>> when we request again it it became
[1:10:27] apparent that it was really Aaron in
favor of Zoom and me in favor of in
[1:10:31] person and I didn't feel comfortable
making the decision. I wanted to hear
[1:10:34] from commissioners.
>> Um,
[1:10:36] » what about
And
[1:10:40] » what about the senior center? Didn't we
use that one?
[1:10:43] » Yeah, Mike just asked that too. Sorry.
It's not going to give you a larger I
[1:10:46] don't think it's big enough actually.
>> If you're looking to acco I don't know
[1:10:50] how many people to anticipate in person.
I know it would exceed the capacity of
[1:10:55] meeting room day. And the other kind of
thing for me too is that when they when
[1:10:59] everyone came out for the you know when
we first opened the public hearing and
[1:11:04] then left I said we'll look for a bigger
venue and so I felt like okay [laughter]
[1:11:10] » I wanted to just make sure that
everybody knows what the options are and
[1:11:14] what the pluses and minuses are of each
one and and make a decision if we can.
[1:11:19] » I agree with you. I think we should be
in person. I think this was a very
[1:11:25] community
[1:11:29] uh
there's a lot of interest and a lot of
[1:11:33] feelings about it and I think that we
should give the community an opportunity
[1:11:36] to kind of be heard together and if we
can make that happen I think that we
[1:11:40] should
>> I guess I guess that's a question is can
[1:11:42] we make it happen
>> I think the dynamics are very different
[1:11:46] » in person
>> person
[1:11:49] » this is we're not talking about just an
in-person meeting this is a hybrid
[1:11:52] meeting of one
>> oh hybrid yeah of course get the
[1:11:55] opportunity for and most folks who
significant
[1:12:01] session
>> right so frankly I think everyone was in
[1:12:05] the room almost there
>> there's some
[1:12:11] what are the possibilities were the
rules on us being here and public being
[1:12:16] online
>> us and applicants being here
[1:12:20] » hybrid hybrid
if if the commission is meeting in
[1:12:24] person then the public would need to be
met in person unless there was a
[1:12:28] specific accommodation for if you were
for example as I explained to Carol if
[1:12:35] there's uh limitations or needing a
larger screen you may attend here in
[1:12:40] person so that you have access to a
screen if you don't have that at your
[1:12:44] home to participate remotely. Um, and
again, we've had uh other hearings where
[1:12:52] a resident did not have access to a
computer, something like that. We set
[1:12:56] them up um at a location where they was
able to participate
[1:13:01] » coming out of the pandemic, the state
legislated how, you know, what the
[1:13:05] options are now post pandemic and post
zoom only. And I think you do have to
[1:13:10] accommodate anyone who can't either
doesn't have a computer or can't has,
[1:13:15] you know, I have some visual impairment.
I have to I would I can't see on my
[1:13:19] laptop plans when they're opened and
zooming in. Sometimes I lose resolution
[1:13:25] » and that can be done upon request. It's
not that
[1:13:28] » I I would probably come here and use the
big screen
[1:13:31] » but we can't then have the public still
struggling with why we can't make it
[1:13:34] happen.
>> Yeah, I would think what about changing
[1:13:37] the meeting next door? Can they change
the date for that? I I that room is
[1:13:42] already
>> that that room is already reserved for
[1:13:47] another group.
>> Well,
[1:13:50] » your option if you're looking to have a
larger venue that's hybrid, the neck
[1:13:55] river elementary school is your only
option.
[1:13:58] » So, what is the AV U setup that we have
to do at Neck River? And
[1:14:03] » that's something I have no experience
doing at Neck River.
[1:14:06] » So, here we have camera and we have
screens. You have camera on the
[1:14:10] television. It's it's a independent it's
a cafeteria. So the IT department would
[1:14:16] have to set that up.
>> It depends whether they have that school
[1:14:19] or not.
>> They they bring the in the I would offer
[1:14:23] that it's a brand new building
that I would expect them to have
[1:14:29] sufficient capabilities to accommodate
if they offer that room for such
[1:14:35] » meetings. Just because we haven't done
it before doesn't mean it hasn't done
[1:14:40] » has have other groups used it
>> the board of selectman have used it for
[1:14:44] uh an EOI
>> and they had a successful hybrid
[1:14:48] sessions.
>> It was a hybrid meeting. I don't you
[1:14:52] know you know it's a there are are
differences between the planning and
[1:14:57] zoning commission and legal proceedings
and and having folks be able to be heard
[1:15:01] and produce transcripts for appeals and
things of that nature. So there there
[1:15:08] are unknowns but you know that has not
appeals have not been generated. Um I
[1:15:13] don't know what the crowds are or how
that sound will transfer. Um the EOI uh
[1:15:21] academy school meeting was a camera on
the side and some uh uh projection
[1:15:27] screen. Um it doesn't give the attendees
necessarily. It would be sort of this
[1:15:33] side view of that
>> and that was recorded. So
[1:15:37] » I don't I I think it was so we could go
watch it.
[1:15:40] » You can go watch it but I'm I I'm saying
there are unknowns that we have never
[1:15:45] staffed the meeting that way. Um, as I
said, there's after school care um in
[1:15:50] that room until 6:30 um every day. Um,
and so there are limitations on getting
[1:15:57] the room ready um after 6:30. Um, and I
don't know who is available at the
[1:16:05] building through maintenance or it to
get that room ready. Um, that's not
[1:16:10] something that falls on your land use
staff to uh set up that school venue. So
[1:16:17] if the commission chooses to move
forward um with a hybrid meeting um know
[1:16:22] that there's a caveat if the
capabilities are not able to be met at
[1:16:28] that room then the meeting um would
wouldn't be appropriate to be there
[1:16:34] » two weeks we have at least two weeks to
determine a course of action.
[1:16:37] » Yeah. Are we allowed to communicate on
this matter via email once we get some
[1:16:42] more uh information around the
capabilities
[1:16:46] technically at NAR?
>> What information are you
[1:16:51] » can we get it there? Can we get this
staff?
[1:16:53] » Can we go look at it and see the room
after
[1:16:56] » can the commission go and look at it
during school hours? I I don't know.
[1:17:00] » Well, Erin, I also offered to go do
practice runs with you if we
[1:17:04] » I'm not able to do that during the day.
I can
[1:17:07] » um the school is in session. We are not
able to do that during the day. The room
[1:17:13] is used for the elementary school and it
is used by afterare until 6:30. We have
[1:17:19] multiple meetings uh between now and
that meeting I'm unable to go and do a
[1:17:25] practice run for the commission.
>> If some of the commission are able to do
[1:17:28] it at a time that works for the school,
is that acceptable?
[1:17:32] » That would have to be coordinated. I
don't know that there's it available or
[1:17:36] anyone to do that. I don't have the
answer to that.
[1:17:38] » What's your sense of the senior center
capacity and and I have I have I don't
[1:17:44] know the number of that and I don't know
if the room is available or not
[1:17:48] » but I wonder if that's worth pursuing
too because it's true we we had almost
[1:17:51] everybody
>> there might be more people coming next
[1:17:55] time. There might be fewer people. Are
we allowed to publish?
[1:17:59] » We're unable to find an alternate
location. Please note the public the
[1:18:02] room can only accommodate X number first
come first serve. We will
[1:18:07] » or and I was also asking if people if
the overflow could sit out you know in
[1:18:11] the hallways with their laptops even and
>> Zoom there are limitations to fire code
[1:18:17] and and things like that. This is why
this isn't typically a decision for the
[1:18:21] commission to make.
>> This is typically logistics of staff
[1:18:25] trying to find a venue that could
accommodate them. So, I don't have all
[1:18:30] of the answers for you as far as, you
know, this room fits 68 people total.
[1:18:36] Um, as you could probably imagine having
>> more chairs,
[1:18:43] » but that's only 30ome chairs.
>> Yeah.
[1:18:48] » I can't, you know, you you run the risk
of a hybrid meeting in this room that
[1:18:53] you cannot fit people. You cannot just
bring couches in and things like that.
[1:18:57] that occurred at the last meeting. Um
when a room is um you know the fire
[1:19:04] marshall and I've done this previously
setting up rooms the fire marshall in
[1:19:08] here measuring and making sure walkways
are adequate. If hallways are full, the
[1:19:13] fire marshall will come down and shut
the meeting down. It has happened
[1:19:17] before. He was here uh a week and a half
ago, two weeks ago for the board of
[1:19:21] selectment meeting. um it it isn't you
know so in planning ahead these are
[1:19:28] these are risks that are taken you may
have IT challenges at a location that we
[1:19:34] have not had any experience with which
could impact potential
[1:19:40] uh transcripts and and legal proceedings
if they happen to
[1:19:47] occur after a meeting um or you know as
I I I can only give you the information
[1:19:54] that we have, the physical challenges of
of staff trying to accommodate these
[1:19:59] rooms um and um what our attorney has
recommended. If the commission wants to
[1:20:06] vote to pick a different room, um I have
no information on the uh senior center
[1:20:11] for you. Um I simply have uh neck river
as your option if you wanted to vote
[1:20:16] this. So I would offer
there are many opportunities for the
[1:20:21] public to come attend our meetings and
we cannot predict who will show up when
[1:20:26] and where. So I think it's
important for us to consider the future
[1:20:31] state of public hearings and if this
room can only accommodate a certain
[1:20:35] number of individuals, we should prepare
for the maximum number to show up in
[1:20:40] this room and perhaps in the future we
might need to consider alternate
[1:20:45] locations. If this is an option in front
of us and we have an opportunity to test
[1:20:50] a location
such as the school, I think we should
[1:20:54] investigate that so that we are prepared
for future public hearings.
[1:20:58] » We're not um
>> we're not untested and untried and we
[1:21:04] have an understanding of what
limitations are in terms of capacity and
[1:21:08] technology and what the experience for
the public as well as the participants
[1:21:11] and the applicants would be. So I I
think we should investigate our options
[1:21:15] further. I would offer adding additional
chairs with consideration from the fire
[1:21:22] marshall and how could we set up this
room in advance to accommodate
[1:21:26] additional
audience members in anticipation of the
[1:21:32] Milroad application. I think that should
be our first option to look at. Um if
[1:21:38] not then I I would recommend we
investigate neck road as an option or
[1:21:42] the senior center.
I my vote for an all zoom meeting would
[1:21:48] be the last option.
[1:21:51] » Anybody else?
>> Do we have time?
[1:21:53] » A quick comment is that I wonder
>> both these arctics and the legality of
[1:21:58] an all meeting
>> and we haven't had anything else. So
[1:22:03] this time just because we know there's
issues coming up we're treating it
[1:22:07] differently. That doesn't look very good
to me.
[1:22:11] » That's a good point.
>> Plus we really need the face to face.
[1:22:14] » That was my thought back during the
pandemic. Right. But question where did
[1:22:17] the border select committee relocate to
after the far?
[1:22:21] » They didn't need to relocate. There
weren't enough people in the hallways.
[1:22:24] » Awesome.
>> But he was called in to look.
[1:22:27] » And did they have they had extra rows of
chairs in here? We set up a room in
[1:22:32] anticipation. This is something that is
not unusual to staff. We constantly
[1:22:37] gauge the expectation of who will be at
public meetings. Um, and I think your
[1:22:44] staff in particular has gone above and
beyond trying to accommodate the public
[1:22:48] and making documents and meetings as
accessible as possible. We're probably
[1:22:54] the only commission that has run a dual
meeting with Zoom access in another room
[1:23:00] which happened during the Tumine uh
hearings. Um people it it it was angry,
[1:23:07] it was unruly. uh the police were here
um and the transcripts were not audible
[1:23:13] and that makes a challenge when
something is appealed and quite frankly
[1:23:18] it's an unnecessary burden on staff um
without any other resources here to man
[1:23:24] two meeting rooms to try to accommodate
that.
[1:23:27] the the the point of public
accessibility is so that it's not
[1:23:33] necessarily to jam as many people in a
room as you're able to to make a
[1:23:39] physical room. It's it's creating
opportunities for people to be able to
[1:23:43] participate in a meeting and hear
clearly and the commission to be heard
[1:23:48] and to and to see yes visually. um
you'll know you fill this room with 68
[1:23:54] people, you have one screen that is
visible. This screen does not screen
[1:23:59] share you. So these are things that you
are all need to be considered. There's
[1:24:04] no more exploration of options in this
room um for
[1:24:09] » you know this is how at our August
meeting was it this set up for the rows
[1:24:13] of chairs?
>> Yes.
[1:24:14] » Yeah.
>> Yes. So
[1:24:17] » you can fit one more row of chairs here.
That that is
[1:24:21] » 30 and it says what?
>> 689
[1:24:24] of us.
>> Yeah.
[1:24:26] » You have to look at the size of the
chairs and the furniture that we have in
[1:24:30] here and that includes staff in the
commission as well. So although those
[1:24:36] the number in capacity for the square
footage for the room may be 68, you may
[1:24:41] not physically be able to fit 68 chairs
in this room for people based on the
[1:24:46] furniture that is purchased here. They
have arms on them. We we do the best we
[1:24:51] can to limit the distance in between the
seats and to maintain the emergency
[1:24:56] aisles, but you have a fixed amount of
space here for the public. Got it. Chair
[1:25:02] can't do a reservation.
[1:25:06] » Are we able to add for this meeting?
>> Would we be able to add one more row of
[1:25:11] chairs?
>> Yes,
[1:25:12] » we have chairs that we can set up if
that's where you're looking to go.
[1:25:16] » Know that if you have people in excess,
they will be asked to leave the room and
[1:25:22] if they're in the hallways, they have to
maintain appropriate aisles and they
[1:25:26] would be asked to participate remotely.
The other thing to keep in mind is that
[1:25:30] we haven't even heard this application,
you know, right? I
[1:25:36] that's fine. I'm also leaning for just
having it here increasing as many
[1:25:39] putting it in as many chairs as we can
hoping for the best. See what happens
[1:25:43] but the applicant could still present
the application.
[1:25:48] » Worst case is you have to continue the
hearing because you can't
[1:25:53] » Exactly.
>> I don't have the answer for
[1:25:58] what you're doing. What are you going to
do? Do it all. There's no so
[1:26:01] » said them all.
>> My perspective is we add another row. We
[1:26:05] can't predict who's going to show when
or for whichever hearing we have on any
[1:26:09] given day.
>> We have advanced warning on this one
[1:26:13] » by chance. When when I walked in here
then I had absolutely no idea we would
[1:26:18] have such a public
>> display response.
[1:26:20] » It was incredibly surprising for me.
Have we
[1:26:23] » so I don't think on any given session we
can anticipate public attendance to that
[1:26:28] degree. Can we make some kind of an
announcement for public hearing that you
[1:26:31] know
>> space is limited and
[1:26:34] » I think the public is aware of how large
this room is and they're going to clam
[1:26:38] when they get here if they want to
attend and if they get a seat they get a
[1:26:40] seat. If not I'm sorry they stand in the
hallway and if they if they create a
[1:26:46] disturbance they'll be asked to leave.
That's just the nature of how we
[1:26:49] operate.
>> We really can't have them milling around
[1:26:51] on the back there and nose against your
glass, right?
[1:26:54] » Who's to say they didn't show up like
that today? We would not have been
[1:26:56] prepared. Well, we weren't prepared for
that.
[1:27:02] » Citizens will be behaved. I don't think
there's any reason to expect.
[1:27:06] » And if they so choose, they can go sit
in their car and join from their phone.
[1:27:10] » Yeah, we'll listen,
take notes.
[1:27:14] » I think the best option is accommodate a
safe amount of capacity in this room and
[1:27:21] we proceed as planned. Well, then how
about we have like the fire marshal here
[1:27:27] or somebody here to kind of manage the
thing if it gets out of hand?
[1:27:32] » Sure.
>> I don't think I'd worry, but it's of
[1:27:36] course
>> prior preparation for
[1:27:39] » certain
thoughts. I've already given my opinion
[1:27:46] other opinions to give. Can we request a
police officer be here to help with
[1:27:51] crowd control or the the fire marshall
come and check to make sure
[1:27:54] » the fire marshall will if the room is
crowded the fire marshal will show up?
[1:27:57] » Sure.
>> If people are overflowing in the room
[1:28:00] into the hallway the fire marshall will
be here to make sure there are no fire
[1:28:03] code violations.
>> That's not a police officer maintained
[1:28:09] » role.
Okay. So um I guess we could but you
[1:28:16] have to know as the chair it's your
responsibility to tell the attendees to
[1:28:22] this meeting how they will have to
>> attend the meeting when there's if there
[1:28:27] is no room in this meeting room for them
>> what's the
[1:28:31] » and Erin is there any way to in advance
>> not the night of when they arrive
[1:28:36] telling them this but
>> is there any way to get some
[1:28:38] notification out that we anticipate
large
[1:28:43] » maximum capacity.
>> I wouldn't even
[1:28:44] » I wouldn't even do that.
>> It's almost self-fulfilling prophecy.
[1:28:51] » Okay. I would
>> let the public do what it
[1:28:56] » I think one thing you could do I think
one thing you could do is ask people
[1:28:59] once they speak and give their opinion
and they've said their bit that they're
[1:29:03] going to have to they're going to have
to leave and let someone else come in
[1:29:06] that needs to. And you can do it that
way too that they can't sit through the
[1:29:10] whole thing and listen here. They can go
to their cars or, you know, whatever and
[1:29:15] watch the rest of it if you're going to
have it in person. But I think, you
[1:29:19] know, I I got to I think we have to
respect the staff. I mean,
[1:29:24] » Aaron knows and
I I think we we do she's right. We do
[1:29:30] accommodate everyone on these thing and
let everyone speak and which I think is
[1:29:34] wonderful and we have to do that but at
the same time we have to think about um
[1:29:39] doing you know being efficient too and
if the best way to do it is through a
[1:29:43] zoom you know I think I I personally
think we need to respect the staff knows
[1:29:49] best.
She sees she sees meetings. She knows
[1:29:54] the co fire, you know, she knows all
this stuff and how much what the
[1:29:59] furniture, you know, we have to
accommodate and setting up. I mean, when
[1:30:02] I heard that they're going to set up 200
chairs after the kids leave at 6:30 from
[1:30:07] after school in an elementary school
where parents are picking up, I think
[1:30:11] that's a disaster waiting to happen. I
think that's a really bad idea.
[1:30:16] » Don't think it's necessary. I think we
have the means to to hold the
[1:30:22] appropriate session here as we normally
do
[1:30:27] » and the public will be determined.
>> Yeah, I think
[1:30:32] » I think your your tenure on the
commission has not experienced a very
[1:30:35] busy public hearing, a contentious
public hearing. So I think it will play
[1:30:40] out and if that's the decision that the
commission would like to vote on. Um
[1:30:45] that's what Carol has brought to the
floor then
[1:30:49] so we give it a try. That's up to the
>> the commission decision at this point.
[1:30:53] » Janet and John you might be in favor of
Zoom.
[1:30:56] » I would vote for Zoom. Yeah.
>> Do you want to have a full vote on this?
[1:31:00] » Yeah. Yeah. So, how about um first raise
your hand if you're willing to try the
[1:31:05] hybrid as usual
>> at this location?
[1:31:08] » At this location?
>> I'm I'm sorry. Um what are what's
[1:31:18] » If we want to formal Robert's rules,
could I have a motion that we have the
[1:31:23] meeting as scheduled as a hybrid in this
room?
[1:31:26] » I provide a motion.
>> Second. Second discussion on favor
[1:31:35] » and that was to John Duca second.
>> Yes.
[1:31:40] » And who was
>> opposed is John Morgan and Janet Pin?
[1:31:49] » J are we clear on the options are hybrid
here additional seating carry on or
[1:31:56] fully zoom?
>> Yeah.
[1:32:00] because said you weren't here during the
Tmaine hearings. [laughter] I mean, it's
[1:32:06] it can get pretty full.
[1:32:10] » Boy, Janet, that was something else.
>> Wow.
[1:32:13] » I just remember going over to the other
room and talking to people who were
[1:32:16] waiting and and them complaining to me
because they couldn't be heard. You
[1:32:20] know, we we were here for three hours
and we're not allowed to speak. And, you
[1:32:24] know, it was it got pretty heated.
Carol, I think you did a great job this
[1:32:30] morning at the top of this session
instructing the audience about the
[1:32:35] comments. If you agree with someone,
keep your comment.
[1:32:41] » I think that was a lovely addition.
>> We have a large number that will limit
[1:32:45] the time for questions and comments.
>> State that up front. You have
[1:32:50] » get it all up front and and that I think
will help the government.
[1:32:55] » Yeah.
timer for each person or for the
[1:32:58] » person total second.
>> No, each person was taking two minutes.
[1:33:04] » And there's a timer. Why don't we select
time
[1:33:07] » as they are
>> handle it as best we can as
[1:33:12] » that work well.
>> Okay. All right. Thanks everybody and
[1:33:16] thanks for your input and
>> the options. Um, next on the Erin, did
[1:33:24] you want to say anything further about
26-29
[1:33:28] public hearing?
>> No.
[1:33:30] » Okay. 26-30128
Samson Rock Drive. This is a site plan
[1:33:35] and major downtown village district of
alteration to stand to install a
[1:33:40] standalone unmanned redemption center in
the existing parking lot. Um, we already
[1:33:45] have the public hearing scheduled for
October 1st.
[1:33:47] » Yes. What is a redemption center? Is
this something religious?
[1:33:53] » Throw your clothes.
>> The application materials are
[1:33:58] » Yeah, you can look at it
>> in there.
[1:34:05] » Okay, but there is you can see on the
>> All right. Next is approval of minutes.
[1:34:12] Secretary,
>> the August uh 20th uh 2026
[1:34:18] minutes. Uh, Janet, you were absent,
correct?
[1:34:21] » I was absent.
>> Um, motion to a review or approve the
[1:34:26] minutes.
Second.
[1:34:30] » Second.
>> Um, I just had a couple of minor wording
[1:34:33] changes. Uh, there was a on page five
improved needed to be changed to
[1:34:38] improved. And on page six, uh, they were
talking about the, uh, valve walls on
[1:34:44] the course. Uh just changing uh install
install warning of flying flying golf
[1:34:52] balls instead of fly golf balls.
>> Not really cool golf balls.
[1:35:00] » No.
>> Any anybody else have any changes?
[1:35:04] » No changes but it was a long meeting.
This is a question of words completion
[1:35:16] [clears throat]
[1:35:19] to approve.
>> Motion to approve.
[1:35:20] » Second.
>> Second.
[1:35:21] » All in favor?
>> Thank you.
[1:35:25] » Thank you, Aaron, for these good
minutes. Yes.
[1:35:28] » Okay. Um, couple of remarks. Aaron and I
have been planning um a couple of events
[1:35:35] let you know about. One is a an informal
session at the surf club of all land use
[1:35:41] related agencies,
commissioners, commission
[1:35:46] members. The invite's about to go out,
Erin.
[1:35:50] » Yep. We'll send it out probably. Um I
was waiting for another flyer um to have
[1:35:55] some final text. So if not tomorrow,
it'll go out Tuesday. Um it's it's
[1:36:00] really kind of more of a gathering for
land use related boards and commissions
[1:36:05] for us to meet each other, get to know
each other, find out
[1:36:09] » completely optional.
>> Um just to kind of
[1:36:14] may have food but not enough food to
keep you to stay too long.
[1:36:20] » When's the date?
>> On strong field that I'm gonna be
[1:36:23] itching a bit at. So, it it should go um
I I think we said
[1:36:29] » 5 to 7.
>> Yeah. Or 5 to like 6:45, I think.
[1:36:32] Sunset. Nice little sunset and and go.
But it's really um you know, not a a a
[1:36:38] venue to be taking notes and things like
that. It's really kind of to to put a
[1:36:43] face to these various um boards and
committees um who are advisory or
[1:36:50] looking to um move forward their
charges, understand what other
[1:36:54] committees charges are, things like
that. See how they all kind of play a
[1:36:59] role in um some of the goals and actions
of the POC and the strategic plan. um
[1:37:05] kind of grease the skids for uh warming
them all up to give some feedback to the
[1:37:12] commission um on October 1st. We're
hoping um that commission members are
[1:37:17] available from 6:00 to 7 uh to regular
meeting but early
[1:37:21] » to come an hour earlier to allow for a
regulation um informal not informal a
[1:37:28] listening session excuse me um before
the full commission um
[1:37:32] » with
>> and
[1:37:35] our our first
>> it's a regular meeting date
[1:37:39] » um and you have regular business that
starts at 7 but what we're hoping to do
[1:37:43] is have a listening session that will be
available in room C and um via Zoom to
[1:37:49] allow the public um we're going to you
know put something in the paper as well
[1:37:54] and and get this flyer out posted for
everybody um in advance so they know um
[1:37:59] but there there are people who would
like to give some feedback on
[1:38:03] recommended changes to the zoning
regulations um also want to kind of
[1:38:08] understand the project itself what is
within the realm of this project and
[1:38:13] capabilities and what the commission
cannot do. Um, so your consultant will
[1:38:17] be ready to kind of guide that uh
discussion, maybe ceue up some good
[1:38:22] questions for the public to get them
thinking and and um allow for that hour
[1:38:28] of some feedback and then uh move over
here into room A for your regular
[1:38:33] meeting. Um and then um you know based
off of that meeting see if um there's a
[1:38:40] need for additional um feedback
sessions, things like that, more focused
[1:38:45] groups, that that kind of thing. Um
>> sorry, sorry. When when was the date of
[1:38:49] this meeting for all the land use? I
didn't hear the date.
[1:38:53] » That was September 24th.
>> Oh, soon. I'm sorry.
[1:38:56] » September 24th.
>> Yeah.
[1:38:58] » September. And the time was 5. It starts
>> 5 6:37 something like that. Yeah. about
[1:39:04] an hour and a half.
>> Okay. Sorry, I didn't hear the date.
[1:39:06] » It's not mandatory, but it would be
great. It would be nice to go and meet
[1:39:11] everybody.
>> Yeah, I don't know how many, you know,
[1:39:16] folks from the various boards and
committees will come. Um I, you know, I
[1:39:20] suspect at least one or two from them
can come. Um, but you know, you've got
[1:39:25] land use related boards like ZBA or
Inland Wetlands and you know, I'm not
[1:39:30] sure how much since their their charge
is a little specific. I'm not sure how
[1:39:34] much.
>> Um,
[1:39:36] » that's good.
>> So, those are the two dates. I would um
[1:39:39] it would be very helpful for staff if
anyone has a conflict getting to the 101
[1:39:45] meeting at 6:00 um to let me know. I
just want to make sure that at least we
[1:39:50] have the majority of the commission
there um to be able to hear from the
[1:39:54] public. Um and again, that's uh in
person or Zoom, whichever works. If you
[1:40:01] you know, if you're not able to
physically get here by six o'clock, if
[1:40:04] you're able to hop on remotely um before
the regular meeting, that's fine as
[1:40:09] well.
>> Yeah, good point.
[1:40:10] » It's just a listening session.
>> Yes. Yeah, it's a brief a brief overview
[1:40:15] of the project by our consultant and
then um listening to uh members of the
[1:40:20] public and any other group who would
like to uh share some feedback with
[1:40:24] » mostly listening.
>> That's it's not going to be a
[1:40:27] conversation.
>> It kind of I think it kind of depends on
[1:40:30] who shows up like if you have a large
group and you need to kind of hear from
[1:40:34] a lot of people. if it's a smaller group
there. I mean, yes, we encourage
[1:40:39] interactive, you know, uh, conversations
here with that. It's not it's not a form
[1:40:45] of public hearing or anything like that.
It's really a chance to to start hearing
[1:40:51] from people and to hear the conversation
about
[1:40:55] » what is entailed in regulation updates
and revisions and things. Okay.
[1:41:00] » But because it is an hour, it's not
going to be a long presentation. It's
[1:41:05] really just kind of brief introduction
and then letting everybody
[1:41:10] » talk. Sure. I think it sounds great.
It's block my calendar.
[1:41:13] » Question on the the surf club thing. Is
it considered a meeting?
[1:41:18] » It's it's I mean we'll notice it as a as
a gathering. It's not Yeah, it's not a
[1:41:24] um it's a multi-group workshop. It's not
um anything
[1:41:29] It's not it's not meant to be boards and
commissions giving specific feedback to
[1:41:36] specific members of the commission.
That's what the October 1st meeting is
[1:41:41] for the regulations. This is really just
to kind of hear from folks, see what
[1:41:46] they're working on.
>> The draft that you have of the email to
[1:41:48] send out was great. I thought it just
sets the tone of what it's going to be
[1:41:52] like and what the expectations should be
for people coming. So I think as we get
[1:41:55] more information out there it'll be I'll
put all of
[1:41:58] » it's a general public invite.
>> Of course it's a public meeting. It's
[1:42:02] the intent of
>> the surf club.
[1:42:05] » Yes. The public can attend. It is not
meant to be a a public interact.
[1:42:11] It's
>> okay. So that makes sense.
[1:42:14] » It's a meeting designed to allow for
various committee members to interact
[1:42:19] and and have conversation.
>> Okay.
[1:42:21] » Um that's that's the intent.
Great. Thanks. I have a motion to
[1:42:26] adjurnn. I'll make a motion. [laughter]
Got a second, third, fourth, and fifth.
[1:42:31] Anybody's got it all in
>> favor
[1:42:34] at 8:40.
>> Yeah.
[1:42:38] » Thanks, Janet. Thank you. Sorry, I
ditched last minute there. Sorry.
[1:42:46] » Yeah. Thank you for explaining.