[0:06] Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the September 22nd Town Council meeting.

[0:19] At this time, do you want to lead us off on the Pledge of Allegiance? S1:

[0:35] Thank you. Uh, we'll open up for public comment. Uh, Anthony's running to grab the sheet right now.

[0:58] Thank you very much.

[1:02] We have one name on the sheet. Uh, Finn.

[1:13] Is it? S1:

[1:19] Good evening everyone.

[1:20] I'm Finian Hamblett. I'm coming from 222 William Street East, apartment 119. And I'm here, as I was last week, to speak to you guys more about the a LPR as we have in this town. Obviously, we had a bit of a long conversation last time that was stretched to the early morning. Um, but I'd like to kind of reiterate and kind of enhance some of my points about my concerns with Alpers. Um, we have 22 of them in the town of Glastonbury, and they continue to operate in ways that isn't entirely apparent to us. And as a constituent of the town of Glastonbury, um, it's increasingly obvious that they are being operated without the consent of, of the public. There was obviously the town council voted on this. Um but if this were put to a vote of all the people on whether this technology was legal or not, I believe it would be heartily against this. And I don't think this is a partizan issue. I think generally people are against cameras watching their their movements. Um, one of the features that actually some towns canceled this over is something called patterns of life, where they take all of the data that they've collected for you for in Connecticut, 21 days. It depends on the state, of course. Um, and they can pattern it into a heat map of where you go and what you do. So which stores you hit, um, where you go in your daily life, where you commute to, where you commute from, where your home is, who you drive with and more. Um, some, some of these cameras, some of the more advanced versions are currently capable of actually reading human speech by reading your lips much the way folks who are hard of hearing can. Um, I, I mean, that technology kind of speaks for itself and how it can lead into some of these case scenarios where I believe it goes way too far and breaches your Fourth Amendment rights. If I'm walking with a buddy in my park and I say, oh, boy, I'm really not feeling, you know, my job or I'm. I'm thinking of going to McDonald's after this. I don't want them going to report that information, which they may or may not be recording. There have been cases where this stuff has been recorded and then sold back to towns and other states for planning of, of different things. So in places like Colorado, there was a, a, a representative tried to sell this data back to the town, um, for planning of new establishments that the town was going to put in. I believe it was a town pool or something of the sort. Um, and in order to sell this data, why, if they could sell it to the town that's being independently recorded, these are not just the photos that they're taking. This is being recorded on the same cameras. Um, they could sell this to insurance providers. They could sell it to all sorts of folks who you wouldn't want having access to your personal information, including, um, jobs, seeing what you spend your money on, and I believe that's a bit of a violation. Um, there have been some states who've taken a much harsher regulation than we have here in Connecticut, in New Hampshire. The regulation is if the photo is taken and it's not on a hot list, it has to be gone within three minutes, 100 and 80s, which I think is impressive. And I think the state of Connecticut should strive for that. Um, there are also regulations saying that they cannot record any faces of any pedestrians, of any passersby or any drivers of the cars. They can only record the license plates and then pass that information on. There have also been some states, Florida and Texas come to mind where they've been banned from state highways, um, to prevent, you know, tracking of you where you're going across state lines. Um, and I believe that this is something that we should take more seriously in Glastonbury as this continues.

[5:09] Thank you. Finn. Uh, that's the only name that I had on the list. But if you'd like to speak before us, please feel free to come on up. at this time.

[5:22] Anyone on Zoom?

[5:23] If anyone on Zoom this evening would like to join us, please raise your hand in the Zoom app.

[5:30] And I have no one.

[5:31] Mary, any public comment?

[5:33] There were no written public comment.

[5:37] Last chance for anyone to come up. If you'd like to speak before us. No. Seeing none, we will move on to special reports. Our first and only special report is a presentation regarding automated Speed Enforcement speed cameras, which was postponed from September 8th. Jonathan.

[5:57] Yes. So, um, if you could promote Brandon from Dacra. Um, so I just want to make sure he's on board and he can speak. Okay, great. So if you can hear me, the council. Thank you. So the council has discussed automated speed cameras in the past and a couple of months ago. And so since then, the chief of police and I have attempted to get a lot of information from the departments that have utilized these. We've been successful at getting some information, basic info, but the chief suggested that we bring on Dakota Tech because for two reasons to provide information to the Council in the form of a presentation tonight. The first is Dakota Tech has clients and several clients in Connecticut, Washington, Middletown, Marlboro, Beacon Falls, Prospect, the city of Groton and Ansonia, and in particular, they've had Marlboro and Middletown for about a year. And so those are communities that I think most of us are familiar with. And so we met with Brandon just to talk about the process of how this happens. We're very impressed with his knowledge. And so no cost to the town. He's willing to talk about how this happens in terms of a community getting a program up and running the process and also going to talk about how the technology works. Talk about data and answer questions about data and privacy concerns. And also, I did provide information, uh, to the counselors about revenue. Since we have a year for both Middletown and Marlboro. I provided it's in the backup materials and it's also here, uh, in hard copy format because the Excel spreadsheet is so big about what Middletown and Marlboro have experienced in terms of revenue and costs associated with the the program for a year. So with that, Brandon, please introduce yourself and and present.

[7:52] Uh, yeah. Good evening. Uh, thank you for having me on tonight. Uh, it's a pleasure. I've done quite a few of these with a lot of the other surrounding towns. So again, thank you for having me on tonight. Um, my name is Brandon Knox. I'm with Dakota Tech. Uh, we're based out of Itasca, Illinois, which is a basically a collar county city out just outside of Chicago. And I am the head of business development and sales for the company. And I've been traversing your state for the last probably 2 or 3 years. Um, you know, supporting communities, helping them get these, uh, systems launched and up and running. And I kind of want to share a lot of my knowledge with you guys first about this stuff. Again, I understand that people are having the discussions around the different types of cameras, and rightfully so. We want to make sure that these things are going to the law, uh, and staying on task with how the statute is actually written. I would have to say Connecticut did a very good job of writing your legislation. First and foremost, I want to get that out because some of the other states are behind. So I would have to say and condemn your people or not condemn. I'd have to commend your people at the at the state level. They did a very good job with your legislation because some of the states are not so great. Um, so I'd like to kind of start, um, I can't really see my presentation, but I'll kind of walk you through it again. Speed enforcer is a product that's powered by darker tech and.

[9:18] Let's see if I can. Okay, there we go.

[9:27] Let's say.

[9:30] We have an apprentice learning tonight. Matt. This is Matt's last night. So things are going to be a little bumpy, but.

[9:36] That's okay.

[9:37] On the job.

[9:38] That's okay.

[9:44] Just go up to slideshow. Yeah. There you go.

[9:49] And then you'll have to get the other screen.

[9:58] Yeah. You can, you can go back to the the go to the second slide. That's fine. Um, so again, first and foremost, this is one of the main reasons I always, you know, start off with this, um, this is actually one of the images, uh, in Illinois. Uh, Illinois has pretty strict laws around the automated speed enforcement cameras as well as red light cameras. And they actually only allow Chicago currently, but legislatively, they allow the other towns across the entire state to issue warning tickets. So this is one of our warning ticket clients in Illinois. And actually, this was a kid that was doing 53 and a and a 25, uh, passing while kids were being let out of school. And this is the kind of stuff that, you know, we're trying to correct with these systems and help, you know, with the public private partnership to make sure that this doesn't happen. Um, one of the cool things was, is that some of the analytics and the data behind this that they can have in Illinois to store data on their, on their restrictions, they can hold this data up to 12 months and they ended up doing a proactive traffic stop and found this person. It was a high school kid and they had a chat with him. Obviously, his parents were called the station a couple days later, and they were very happy that they had the conversation because he was obviously driving way too fast in the school zone because ultimately, this could have turned pretty bad if one of those kids was screwing around on the sidewalk or ran out. You know, this is what we're trying to prevent. Uh, next slide please.

[11:34] Uh, it's this the automated speed is not is not one solution. Okay, so there is multiple solutions that you guys already probably have in your town. Um, if you click through this, it'll kind of show you it's got some automation. There you go. So this is one of the things that you probably see all over the place, uh, T2 over Yukon. Uh, they, uh, bought into a program for providing these radar feedback signs, which I'm assuming you have some in your town. They're all over the state of Connecticut. And actually the, one of the partnering companies that we get our cameras from, they are the actual provider of that contract to the T2 program. The other piece is obviously speed limit signs. Those are the first lines of defense in terms of slowing people down and notifying them and letting them know. Uh, and then I would say the third layer of this is going to an enforcement, which can be your traditional enforcement, or it can be this new type of enforcement, which is the automated side because again, police is already doing many, many jobs. They have all these different, you know, tools that they can use and utilize and radar guns and everything like that. This is more of a, an approach to help them out and give them resources to do their job and change that behavior in a quicker manner, which I'll show you later in the presentation of some of the results that these systems have. Um, which is pretty astonishing on how quickly they actually can change behavior. Uh, next slide please. This is the initial launching. So in terms of oversight. This is again, I commend I commend the state on doing this. Some states don't have this vigorous of a process in order to get a program in place. You have to launch these systems with. This is kind of the beginning. It's understanding how they work, doing info meetings and things like that. But eventually it gets to you choose a vendor and then you have to go through a CT dot the office, the, the office to get approved. So you put together a what a permit or it's called an a t d plan. And that plan gathers data from crash data to speed studies to qualified census tracts, uh, engineering of the road, um, high quality engineering drawings that have to be put in place to be submitted up to the post office for them to approve it. So in order to get a singular location approved to run one of these systems, the post office has to sign off on it first, and that is even prior to you guys establishing an ordinance. So you'd have to establish an ordinance. You'd have to all agree on that. This is the the proactive approach, but really it's starting with information meetings. I usually teach a lot of this stuff in your state to kind of help people understand how this program works from start to finish. And I'll kind of explain why I know more of the due process and some of the other companies might. But the biggest thing is, is that you have to pass that ordinance, but really getting the data and running traffic studies ahead of time to understand if you have a speeding problem or not, that's really what you got to find out. And again, Dak provides those pro bono. We don't charge for them because again at the end of the day it doesn't matter if the systems won't get approved by Osta office then then it's kind of a moot point. So really you have to go through a very rigorous process before you even get there. Now, if you want to reapply after time goes on, you can reapply and add more locations, and you just kind of run through the same approval process. And then that permit is actually valid for three years for those locations that are approved. So again, if you want to add more locations, then you go through the process again. So once that's all done, then you've established your program. And then this is kind of the the stages in which the system works. So once everything is put in place, contracts are done. The, the, the systems are installed, everything is in place. Then you have to go through a 30 day warning period according to the statute, which again, I do agree with. Uh, that is a big, big piece of this. You're going to have community outreach. You're going to be running a system that's not issuing citations. You're going to let the people know and notify them right away that this is happening. And I have to give, uh, Chief Costa and their team over at the city of Middletown big credit. He made sure his signage and everything was very prevalent when he ran the programs. And he actually reduced speeding quite a bit just in the warning period. And I have some data to show that later on. If you click through, it kind of does like a little follow the follow the arrow. Um, so once it's done it, you, you capture a violation. If you can go back, go back one. I gotta explain that, um, you capture a violation. The violation goes through a processing software in which not, not only does the vendor look at it and review it to make sure all the data is correct. Also, the town is the final say. So the police department is ultimately the arm that will be doing the yes violation. Yes. This is a warning. No, this is not a warning. No, this is not a violation. So there is multiple eyes on these citations before they even go out to the people in the mail, once they hit the mail. The most important piece, and I will emphasize on this greatly is the due process, making sure your due process is in place, just kind of similar to how every town in the state of Connecticut is very in, you know, in in line with the Citations and fractions bureau, it's basically taking that type of process and then locally adjudicating it. So allowing people to contest their violations, allowing them to have their day and have their say on why they did or did not speed. There's six different reasons that the state allows for you to contest, and those are explained in the statutes if you want to look it up. The other piece is just allowing people to pay. So there's a platform inside of our software that allows people to contest it, request hearings, as well as manage and pay their citations. The last piece is the analyzation of the violations. So in the first 18 months after the system goes live, the state of Connecticut also wants to see the data on how these systems are working. Um, we were one of the first systems to be up and running in the state. So they kind of came to us a little preemptive, especially with City of Middletown going live. And they had so much data to provide that They asked us a little early, so we provided some of that. And actually it's in your packet. Some of the stuff that you see in front of you is in your is what we submitted up to the the DOT, but they really want to make sure that these systems are working and they're kind of having a watchful eye on it. So every year after. So you have to support that and you have to give them their data or give all the data that you've provided and ran through the city. Uh, next slide please.

[18:16] These were the systems look like. Um, we supply both not only a solar solution, but we also have some AC hardwired, uh, their night vision, IR coloring on the imagery. Uh, the mounting, obviously, you can see it's always professionally done, whether it's to an existing pole or in a pole that we would provide to you guys. Um, and then obviously operationally, it can go into -40 up to 140. I mean, we've had these cameras all the way up in Canada all the way down into, you know, some southern southern states like Texas and things like that where super hot Arizona, super hot, Florida Super hot. Um, next slide please.

[18:54] This is what the system is going to look like. So if you click on it, it'll show you the car will go across the animation for you. But signage is very important too. So according to the AtSb rules, you have to have these proper signs in place before the system can go live. Okay. So these signs are up way in advance before the system even goes. And again, it's a rear facing camera. So it only takes a back picture of the vehicle. So we don't actually know who's in the vehicle. Um it only captures the plate make and model. And that's the ability to be able to send the violations in the mail. Um, after a violation has been approved by the police. Next slide please.

[19:34] Data. Obviously this is a very, very big thing. We take it very seriously. So one of the other things you have to understand about Dacron. Dacron has been in the business of administrative adjudication or local municipal court for over 20 years. Uh, in On Illinois, I help with probably 175 different municipalities, one of which is Cook County, which is the second largest county in the entire United States. We our software runs their court hearings for them. So data privacy is huge. We do not sell data outside. The data is yours. Okay. In our contracts, they're ironclad. We do not move data around without your permission. And we don't intend to move data outside the confines of the system without your permission. If anybody's going to ask for it, it's probably going to be the cities that ask for it because they either want to share it to their ERP system or an Ms. system, which our police systems mostly, or municipal systems. But to basically just track things not internally and in terms of people, but just either payments and things like that, so that it's a communication on the finance side. Um, the other piece is, is that we are governed by SoC two compliance as well as inlets. Inlets is a very, very difficult thing to get in place. Inlets is where the 50 state repository registered owners goes. So when we go and look up a plate, that's where we're getting the information. We have to go through a rigorous two year process just to get approved. Uh, all of us are just compliant and tested. We also are all fingerprinted and sent up to the federal government for FBI for review. So even including myself, everybody that works for Dacra, we all are governed by those rules. Uh, next slide please.

[21:13] So what the system looks like if you click through, this is just how you know the processing of the citations work. So just click through. It'll be a couple. It's three, three steps. So there's three easy steps. So the first step is to confirm a violation. That's my team. So we have retired law enforcement that actually review these first. They're basically making sure that the over speeds are there. You know that the the camera was triggered at the correct over speed. The license plate are correct as well as the make models and colors are correct. Uh, once they hit approve on their system, it gets sent over to the police department for them to review it again. And now they'll have all the registered owner information in order to create a site warning or even a citation. So it's pretty much a streamlined process. Now there's also rejections. There's reasons for rejections. It could be, um, a lot of times it's emergency vehicles going to and from, uh, there's an ability to, you know, reject them based on if it's not enough evidence to, to support a violation like the, the plate could be blocked. It could be, it could be anything, but there is rejections, there's tracking on those rejections, and there's an audit trail on all of those rejections. So it's not only transparent to you as a municipality as well as the people. So the third piece is sending the notices. Again, it goes through a large mailing house that we can control on our side. And ultimately that's where all the violations are sent from. Uh, next slide please. This is what the software looks like. So this is what step one looks like. If my people are operating in it, there's two little thumbnails they can actually deep dive into those thumbnails. Zoom in and I'll show you that in the next slide. But this is where the data comes in. This is where they can show, you know, make model color. If there's yellow, the green bars, they actually do mean something. It means that, you know, the data needs to be cleaned up a little bit. Maybe the, the, the optical character recognition didn't quite catch the plate. So if they have to read it better, they can go in and actually zoom in on the plates. Uh, the other piece is to is they just, you know, there might be pieces where you guys are mandating that you have make model color, uh, on those. And sometimes the color doesn't come in because it might be a nighttime image or things like that, but they can go in and actually clean up the data. Uh, also the time date and stamp as well as the location on there, because that's what you need in order to execute a warning or a citation. Next slide please. This is that more zoomed in version. This is the modal. So this is what step two would look like for an agency. This is what they'd be reviewing every single time is they have all the information on the side. It even shows like if it's a school zone or it's not a school zone, um, it'll show the over speeds, uh, including, you know, location, time, date stamp again. And then on the right hand side is when all the registered owner information is so that they know where to send the, the violation to, uh, next slide please. So this is what the violations look like. So pretty standard across the board. You got two thumbnails. You have all the metadata, which is like the time, date, location, the speed over. Um, obviously the statute requires, you know, you got to put on there, how are you going to, you know, let people exercise their due process. You'll have all those rules on the back of the side of the actual violations. So that's all customizable. But the QR codes are important too, because that's another way for us to help people get to our citizen portal, which I'll show you in a second. And that's where people can manage their citations. You can put the URLs on there, or they can allow the people to come in and pay in person, you know, having that personal interaction with your community, you know, based on, you know, regular tickets. I'm sure, you know, a lot of people get parking tickets and sometimes they want to just go in and pay on themselves and things like that. We can help manage that process as well. Next slide please.

[24:59] And then this is a citizen portal. So this is a this is a way where, you know, the, the, the people that do get violations, they can go in, they can manage their citations, they can request hearings and get a hearing request dates. They can also contest them. So they don't have to necessarily go in person to, you know, see a hearing officer, they can just contest it. And then the, the city or the hearing officer can make a ruling on that violation type. Um, but this is a very helpful tool. This is kind of the, the back end piece where everybody can then ultimately, you know, have a good user experience. We're always trying to make this more friendly because again, we're trying to appease everybody in the public. You know, anything that we can do to make things easier for people to A be compliant or B give them their due process. That's, that's what we're in the business of. Uh, next slide please. And then we get into some of the data. So this was, uh, some of the habitual offender pieces. So this was data from Middletown. And ultimately this is where, you know, we, we were able to, in the beginning, uh, according to the a t d rules was we were able to hold on to data for at least 30 days. We were just basically holding on to play data time and location. And then ultimately the fine amount. But during the warning period, this was actually a habitual offender. Uh, if you click it again, uh, Middletown had a, had a pretty, pretty strong problem. They had a lot of reckless driving. So this person had 20 over the speed limit, seven times egregious speeding, nine. And then they were doing, they had 21 events in just 30 days. And we found out it was actually this person. It was a kitty cats. It's a it's a service. I guess that as school aged children in it and they were flying around on this road and this is ultimately was, you know, not a good situation. But at the end of the day, you know, the person did slow down and that's really the goal. So once they got through the violation piece, it definitely caught their attention and it definitely slowed them down. Uh, next slide please.

[27:03] And this was in the first four months with Middletown. So Middletown since they had so much data. So in the beginning they had, they, they roughly had about 150, 000 people violating, uh, just ten over the speed limit, um, on a given month. That's, that's how much speeding was happening on route 66 there. Uh, if you've driven that road, I've driven it many, many times. It's, it's people trying to beat lights and things like that. They're in a hurry. I get it, it's a dual highway. But at the end of the day, you know, you're trying to get people to slow down because they have a lot of crashes in that area. But really they were able to just inside of four months, reduce it by 94% in terms of 20 over the speed limit. So they actually had a trigger speed of 20 miles an hour over first because A, they didn't want to overload their, their city employees with trying to process all this, but they wanted to focus on the egregious speeding first, then work their way down. And that's how they actually implemented their program successfully. And I think that that was the fair way to do it, because again, the idea is to catch people's attention, to change behavior. It's not to just completely litter everybody with tickets and, you know, ultimately generate as much money as you can. We're not we're not that type of company. I don't recommend anybody does that. I really recommend that you roll this out slow and you let it do its course and change behavior over time. Not in the first month. Not. Next slide please.

[28:27] The compliance victory. So you can kind of see they had about 75% of people were speeding at all times, at about roughly 8% of the people were compliant. But the cool victory in all this, and I, I always, I always kind of commend I didn't realize that in your state, even during the warning period, you can see the compliance flipped without even sending a citation. It grabbed everybody's attention enough to have more compliant drivers than non-compliant drivers. And that's really the win here. And that's where we're trying to emphasize to communities that it does work. It's just it's going to take time. And I have to say that the Middletown police, they did a fantastic job of really staying on top of this and making sure that the experience and the due process was given to their citizens at a very high level. And we're there to support you guys the entire step of the way. And that's kind of my little commercial on that. But this is this is really what these programs look like. Uh, next slide please.

[29:27] This is Marlboro, so I, uh, I pulled their data. Um, they, they also kind of had a similar track record. They, they didn't have as much speeding in their area. Their, their trigger speed was at 11. Um, we always kind of tell people to set the trigger speeds on the cameras at 11 just to err on the side of caution. Um, but at the end of the day, again, they had the same kind of results. Their first few months. They, they, they flipped the compliance level higher than the non compliance. So they had about 50% reduction in speeding. So the systems do work. Um, and it's pretty astonishing that it works in a rapid fashion from the time that we run the traffic studies to the time that you ultimately implement it, and then the warning periods, it really ramps up and gets people's attention because they're like, oh my God, these things are here. They see all the signage, they see the camera, and they understand that it's just not okay to speed in those towns. Uh, next slide please.

[30:24] And that's the end of my little spiel and I can leave it up to questions.

[30:31] Anything you guys want to know more in depth? S5:

[30:50] What's the process that you've undertaken with those communities to, to determine where where cameras should go and where they shouldn't go? S6:

[32:35] Hope that answers your question.

[32:38] Brandon. Uh, this is Chairman Turner. I just want to first off, say thank you for coming back to us. And I apologize for you sitting around for very, very long time, two weeks ago, only to to get dismissed at the end of the meeting without getting to present to us. But at this time, I'll open up for questions to the other councilors. Larry.

[33:00] Hi, Brandon. Um, I'm Larry Nylund here. I'm the IT guy, actually, at Middletown Police Department. So we've met. Um, I'm going to ask you probably a couple questions. Um, but more so everybody can get a clearer explanation of what's going on here. Um first non ticketed data. How long are you storing that? Is that the 30 days also.

[33:22] So the non ticketed data is. So there's there's the rejections that would more than likely are going to be wiped after the 30 days. That's our current program. Um the ones that are non people that drive through the camera and are never there, they didn't, you know, didn't trigger a camera violation or anything like that. All it does is it doesn't actually know a vehicle, it just knows a vehicle passed it and it just says, okay, a vehicle passed. That's it. There's no data collected or nothing. Um, but we have to hold on to those traffic counts so that we can supply those compliance by rate charts that ultimately the DOT wants.

[34:03] Is there any option for the local municipality to store their data locally?

[34:10] Um, the current data where it's stored right now across the board is in Azure government Cloud, uh, through our systems. So each individual client currently right now has their own Microsoft Azure government cloud environment. So we don't co-mingle data with other communities or anything of that sort. We haven't hosted anything locally, but I would not put it out of the question. It's just the way we do it currently.

[34:34] Okay. Can you talk about the allowed uses for the revenue generated in the state of Connecticut?

[34:42] Yeah. So they're they're pretty clear. I'll give you the generic version. It's basically anything that is traffic safety related. So the funds can be held on to by the city in an account and then be used for traffic safety related products, meaning going back into the system, going buying radar feedback signs. Um, I've heard paving, I've heard anything that's going to make the roads safer.

[35:06] Um, and can you describe the, um, the process for collections if someone does not pay Their citation.

[35:17] Correct. So it kind of goes back to that due process piece. You have to make sure that you follow those correct due process rules, meaning you allow people to contest. You got to allow them to ultimately, if they get a notice of assessment after they didn't contest, and then they have to get a final notice of assessment. So they're going to get multiple letters all along the way. And then when you get to the end of that portion, then you could ultimately choose to send it to a collections firm if you choose to or not. But you have to follow those due process laws before you can even get into collections firm.

[35:53] And lastly, our ramp up in terms of personnel in Middletown was, um, less than optimal. We'll say that as trying to deal with the volume. How is your experience been since that's come online and in And getting other departments prepared for the volume of work. And you can. Can you discuss the amount of employees that need to be hired? And I know the money can be used from the citations to pay their salaries. But just if you can talk to that a little bit, please.

[36:32] Yeah. So again, when you run traffic studies and that kind of gives you the first gauge because you're going to have to understand like be like, okay, the traffic studies are going to tell us how many violations on average. Now, the first, when we kind of do our traffic studies, it's broken up into like little speed buckets, like, you know, 11 to 15 miles an hour over and then 16 to 20 and 20 over. So we're tracking to see what our, what are we ultimately going to be looking at from a volume standpoint? First, based on those traffic studies, it'll help with us assessing the process first, the first, like 11 to 15 miles an hour over those buckets, that speed bucket that's over. You're probably going to correct that in the first 45 days. We kind of look at that as like a, a barometer of, yeah, this is not going to be as crazy as I think, because again, I can't tell if those people are going 11 or 12. And most of the time those people are going to be compliant. It's the ones that are in the 16 over. And based on that assessment, most of these cities, you know, when they first started, I do have to give Middletown credit. They did that 20 trigger so they didn't overwhelm themselves. But again, I think they underestimated some of the work that was going to be coming their way. But then they corrected it and definitely put their people on task. So we kind of know from those speed studies now on how much personnel is going to be required after the traffic studies are conducted.

[38:00] I'm good for now. Thank you.

[38:03] If I may just add something to I just picked up on something that councilor um, Nyquist just said, the data that you have on the spreadsheets for the revenue for Marlborough and for Middletown, it does show a fine revenue. It shows costs, um, that that is taken by Discotek in order to facilitate this program. It does not reflect personnel costs that the departments have added, I believe in in Marlborough it's minimal. But but to Larry's point, it is um it is, it is significant is what I understand.

[38:42] Thank you. Tom.

[38:45] Just to piggyback on Larry's comments, and I'm thinking of Marlborough. Uh, I know where that traffic signal camera is located. Um, what was the experience there? I believe they operate with a state trooper. I don't even think they have a police department per se.

[39:07] What was their experience? S6:

[39:53] Okay. A question, Jonathan, did you have a discussion with your, um, equal over there in Marlboro?

[40:00] I did.

[40:01] And.

[40:04] What was that discussion?

[40:06] I mean, he provided the the details about, you know, the activity of the program. I think that you see reflected in the spreadsheet.

[40:14] Did he provide an opinion?

[40:16] He did not provide an opinion. Um, he just he also I asked him inquired about the personnel burden. It was not significant as he described it. It's basically what Brandon said. Staff existing staff has been trained to deal with it. Um, but that was the extent of our conversation.

[40:37] Kurt.

[40:39] Thank you. Uh, the first slide that you showed, sir, with the, uh, the high school dude running through, um, hypothetically, if his car was exactly at the same position as the car in front of that picture.

[41:00] Who gets the ticket? S6:

[41:24] Okay.

[41:25] And when on that picture you showed us, there's that flash on, on your on your demonstration. Is there a, would the individual or the automobile know the driver, know that they just had their picture taken or the license plate taken?

[41:43] It depends on the each individual location. So we do when we go and do the installations and the site surveys and look at the sites. Sometimes ambient light helps with the IR, uh, technology so that they can see better at night. But during the day there's no flash because there's obviously ambient light. It doesn't require a ton of ambient light to take the nighttime images, but sometimes there is an instance where an illuminator is put in place but is very dim. They might pick up on it that it happened, but typically we like to look in these site surveys and these locations, that there is some ambient light to help with those nighttime images if you need.

[42:20] So and on the, um, in your experience on the, on the reviews of the citations, is it typically done by a certified officer or a civilian employee?

[42:33] I would say 90, 95 to 98% of it is, is law enforcement.

[42:43] And how long before the, uh, the letter is issued after review? Any idea?

[42:49] Yeah. Uh, after after the police department or the authorized person has, uh, clicked, you know, that they want to send a citation or warning. Um, typically it's sitting in our queue and it could be mailed out to them into their house within a few days.

[43:04] Okay. Um.

[43:11] Another hypothetical. Let's say there's a citation issued for $100. And you said the does all the revenue go to the community or does your organization take a a chunk of that?

[43:25] Yeah. So the, the way the legislation actually reads and I can we can go actually to the law. There's a it's a $50 fine on the first offense. It's 75 on the second offense inside a 12 month calendar year. And you also have the ability to charge a $15 admin processing fee on top of it. So hypothetically, if the person pays online and takes care of the violation, our fees typically are based on a service model. And again, you can look up, you can you can ask other communities what they ultimately pay. But really, at the end of the day, it's yes, there is a portion of the revenue that gets taken out of the fine amounts. Correct.

[44:11] And what about set up costs?

[44:14] There is no set up fees, uh, with the, the systems again, because it is like a service contract. So we will ultimately there's no capital expenditures that you guys are going to have to incur to put the cameras in place. Um, and typically we run about a 12 month, uh, initial contract and we have 90 day out clauses.

[44:36] Uh, are you aware of any experience where a vehicle, when they are aware of the location of the camera, will slow down for the portion where the camera exists and then gets through there and speeds up again?

[44:50] So what? And this was, uh, some of the studies that actually Middletown is conducting right now. And they started looking at putting like radar feedback signs and reinvesting into areas and having their people sit around. So there's a lot of omnipresence that goes around with these systems, meaning that with them knowing that the cameras are there, if they're aware of it, yes. Will people sometimes speed up? Of course. But I'm going to tell you right now, they slow down. If you drive that route 66 corridor or the one near Marlborough, people know that that camera is there. People slow down tremendously. So the omnipresence is there, even on the side streets and the cut thrus and things like that. But a lot of those communities are, you know, using other tactics like, you know, putting up a dummy car or ultimately having another officer sitting on the off street or streets occasionally just to have more of a presence. But they're using it as a way to kind of spread their wings throughout the city on the speeding issues.

[45:51] Thank you.

[45:53] You're welcome.

[45:54] Any other questions from counselors? Jen.

[45:58] Thank you, Brandon, for the presentation and information so far. I just have a few questions about, um, really about the data because I think that's one of the larger areas of concern, um, for the license plate readers. Um, and obviously this is a different system, but I think some of the same concerns apply. Um, so in, in addition to some of the questions around the data storage that we already heard, um, I was wondering what, what exactly happens to the data for like say the other car that was in the frame for the, the violators with, with the kids walking like what happens to the data for the non violators? Um, like how long exactly are they held if they're held at all before they're deleted.

[46:45] So if somebody else is in a picture like on a multi lane like that, we're not per se holding on to their data like in a. There's not it's not like that violation has the multiple plates in it or anything like that. There would be a picture. But according to your state statute and the Atsd rules, again, it was at 30 days, uh, after due process is fully given, they have now allowed that to extend to minimal data, meaning like just holding on to the plate and the associated fine up to 12 months. But the pictures and things like that can be removed because at that point, you don't need it once it goes past that point.

[47:25] And what about.

[47:26] When you're trying to hold on to it for multiple infractions?

[47:29] Uh huh. Um, so just to, I think maybe I conflated the two situations. So I think what you were talking about is if another plate happens to be in the picture when there was a violation, but what if I was just driving past and I wasn't a I, I didn't speed, um, what happens to the data in that in those cases.

[47:49] It just tracks that that a car passed it. It's just a daily traffic count. That's it. There's no there's no data retained or plates or anything.

[47:57] So there's no picture taken.

[47:58] No, there's no pictures taken. The only time a picture is taken when somebody actually violates the speed limit. Okay. Or or that or take or does the 11 over or like I said in in Middletown's case, it started at 20 over and then they went down to 15. And that's where they've been at since January.

[48:12] Got it, got it. Okay. Um, and then how do you handle requests or like subpoenas from, from out of state agencies? And maybe this is my lack of awareness of our state law, but I assume that there's laws governing that.

[48:30] So can you just walk us through those types of requests? S6:

[48:56] Okay. Thank you.

[49:00] John.

[49:03] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, your company, do they have access to NCIC?

[49:10] Uh, no, we do not.

[49:12] So there's no there's no, uh, capability to interface with with, uh, running plates through your computer systems.

[49:20] No, no, it's not used for that.

[49:23] Is are your cameras capable of any audio recording?

[49:28] No.

[49:37] Um, what have you guys been lobbying a year in Connecticut?

[49:42] $0.

[49:50] Thank you.

[49:52] No problem.

[49:54] Any other questions?

[49:57] No. Um, I just have a couple of quick questions. So when you log into the portal, if you are planning to appeal the citation, it gives you a list of reasons that you can appeal. Correct.

[50:14] Yes. And it also gives you the ability to write a narrative of why you're appealing as well. So it's not just it doesn't like lock you into like those six reasons that the state applies for. You can give you other narratives as well.

[50:27] Can you tell us what those six reasons are?

[50:29] Uh, two of them are mainly for the emergency vehicles. Uh, one is for stolen vehicles. So if, like you say, your car was stolen and somebody ran through it and got it, and then it was sent to your house, but, you know, you had the ability to provide that. You would just be like, here's my police report. You'd file it directly on the online appeal process, and they could void the ticket right then and there. Um, some of the other ones are in pertains to, uh, God, I can't remember off the top of my head. It's mostly emergency vehicles. There's like, I think it pertains to two of them and then the other one is stolen and then there's three more. I'm sorry, I can't, I can't remember off the top of my head.

[51:09] Okay. But it's a pretty limited scope of reasons.

[51:14] It is. But again, you guys are locally adjudicating them. That's why we've been in the business of local adjudication for a very long time. Been doing this for a very long time for parking tickets, code violations, all that. Everybody always has a narrative. So allowing people to have their day in court and request hearings and say, this is the reasons why they can always have that and submit that to you.

[51:34] Yeah. So I, I'll tell you, we did have one incident. So I own my own company and we have a fleet of vehicles. And and so one of my project managers, uh, trucks ended up getting a citation in Marlborough. Um, and I'm going to tell you a little bit about this and this, this is really my experience because, um, all of our vehicles are GPS tracked and there with the modules that plug into the computer system and to, to in the vehicle. So it tracks all the speed and location, all nine yards, any hard stops, rapid pickups, geolocations, you know, whole nine yards. Um, when I first went on and I saw the six reasons that you can appeal, I was surprised because honestly, it sounds like there's no other reason that you can appeal it, although I will agree that there's a narrative section and, and I did appeal and wrote in the narrative section, um, our truck got a citation for going 11 miles an hour over the speed limit in Okay. Um, but our GPS tracking had it set for ten miles an hour over the speed limit, both before the camera and directly right after the camera. Both sides of it. Um, so I downloaded the data and I submitted a narrative in the portal saying that we agree that the truck was speeding. However, we believe it was going ten miles an hour over the speed limit, not 11 miles an hour over the speed limit. And therefore we thought the citation should be null and void. Um, we never got a response ever. Okay. So so and this was, I don't know, maybe it was very early in the year. It was spring time. So I mean, it's been more than six months. I can't I have to go back and see exactly when it was. Um, but I was a little surprised by The, the appeals process and, you know, um.

[53:46] That gives me a little pause because it, I don't even remember truthfully, if it talked about a hearing or anything like that. Um, but I do remember seeing the six reasons and thinking that was very narrow. Uh, and then I was surprised that I never got any kind of response in regards to the appeal. Um, so, you know.

[54:06] Just so you know, the response doesn't come from us. It comes from it, it allows the software allows them to manage those appeals. I, you don't get a response from Dacra. It's actually has to come from the town itself because they're the ones that technically run the local adjudication court. So.

[54:25] So it's funny because it was $65, I don't remember that much. Um, so what is that appeals process? You know, if somebody submits a narrative.

[54:37] Yeah. So typically how most of the towns are running it is obviously you have your online appeals and you have your hearings for, you know, my request, meaning you would physically go in and plead your case. You can both, you can write your narratives in both places again, as a citizen. And the big thing is, is that you're supposed to be able to appeal inside that ten day window. Most towns will give a couple extra days because again, that's more of a guideline. And the statute is saying giving people ten days. I mean, that's that's pretty low. I know most of the cities are kind of extending that by a few days to allow people to be like, okay, we got it in the mail. We have to have time to respond and things like that. Um, but once that process starts, I mean, it's up to the city to manage those appeals on their own. Our software just allows them to, you know, coordinate it and everything like that. It's not that I'm sitting there, you know, knocking on their door saying, hey, you need to call this guy back because he appealed and you got to give him an answer. That's, that's up to them.

[55:35] So the appeals process. Once somebody submits an appeal, it is totally up to the town on how to handle that.

[55:40] Yeah. There's they're supposed to run through this. The system will manage it for you. They just have to go through and click the buttons and make sure that they're creating the notice of a.

[55:50] Did you get a notice of assessment and everything like that from the town? S1:

[55:51] Okay.

[55:52] All right. Not a thing. So so that's yeah. I assume that they had no idea what to do with the, the, the response.

[56:00] So I'm not going to throw. Yeah. It could, it could be a glitch. It could be. I'm not going to take, you know, full ownership of, of that process. But again, that that's how it should work is, is you should get a notice of assessment, letting you know. And then if it gets ignored, then you get a final notice of assessment is how the process is supposed to work.

[56:19] Yeah. No, we never got got another thing after that. So.

[56:23] Okay.

[56:25] So, uh, yeah, I've got extra time, so uh, go ahead.

[56:34] Um, so I do have a related question, um, which is like, what is the margin of error on the speed detection.

[56:42] The radar sensors, uh, laid out. We have radar and lidar. They both have about a point, uh, two mile an hour, give or take, plus or minus. That's why we always usually set the trigger speeds at 11. And then we have a third party calibration company come in, uh, from out of Maine, and they actually run those certificates and do the calibrations on site when before the systems go live. And that's actually the other. Sorry, that was the other one. Is the calibration certificate valid is another one of the contesting reasons. And actually those are stored. So the minute it's calibrated it's actually stored in the software. And that calibration certificate is actually tied to every single citation that's sent out as well. You don't get the certificate in the mail, but when you go to the citizen portal, it'll show it to you when you're managing your citations.

[57:35] Thanks.

[57:36] So as another personal follow up. Which do you think would be more precise? A device plugged directly into the computer of the vehicle or your cameras?

[57:48] They use the same radar and lidar sensor technology. It's the same as if it was in a squad or if it was on a camera. It's the.

[57:55] Same. No, I'm talking about device plugged directly into the vehicle that's traveling. Oh.

[58:01] I I'm not an expert on that. I don't I don't know, off the top of my head. I have to take a look at that type of technology before. I mean, I haven't heard that response yet.

[58:09] So yeah, first time for everything, right?

[58:12] Yeah. Of course. Yeah, absolutely.

[58:16] Um, any other questions? Nope. Well, thank you very much, Brandon. Appreciate it. Yeah.

[58:24] No thank you. I appreciate the time. And, uh, yeah, let me know if you need anything else or any questions and send them to Jonathan and I can answer anything you guys need.

[58:33] Thank you.

[58:34] Thank you. Have a good night.

[58:37] Uh, we are two minutes away from our public hearing. So I don't think we're going to move on to the next set of business, but we'll take a quick pause for two minutes.

[58:58] Are you guys like Pizza Hut where you're late or.

[1:00:05] And make up something else. Okay. Do you want one? That was fine as well.

[1:00:12] Yeah.

[1:00:15] Yeah.

[1:00:16] Thank you.

[1:00:20] Um.

[1:00:23] We'll do one more for.

[1:00:35] Good evening everyone. It is 8:00 and so we are going to be opening our our public hearing. Uh, in regards to action to consider an application of Jay Rock development, LLC for a change of zone from planned employment zone to residence, a 155 Addison Road. 25 Mill Street, 45 Mill Street and Lot W, four Mill Street. Uh. This is a continuation of our public hearing from the September 8th meeting. Uh, Council meeting, uh, from two weeks ago. Um, at this time, it's my understanding that Shelley has, uh, some words before we hand it on over to the representative from the developer, Shelley.

[1:01:17] Shelley Caltagirone, director of community development. So before turning it over to the applicant. I just want to summarize the memo that I sent to you on Friday regarding the sale of town owned property on Eastern Boulevard. We are initiating an appraisal and marketing of that parcel in accordance with the referendum. A draft motion has been provided under your new business list to refer the sale of the land to the Town Plan and Zoning Commission for an 824 referral to refer the sale to the Council's Land Appraisal Committee and to set a public hearing. We're hoping that the appraisal is going to be completed in time for your next meeting. We're trying to align your next meeting with the committee's meeting. Uh, the next item is, um, the proposed lot line adjustments that the applicant has provided. Uh, these lot line adjustments would separate out the land on Addison Road for an open space land donation, and for private ownership of a parcel with the house and the barn. A draft motion has also been provided under your your new items list to refer acceptance of the land to the Town Plan and Zoning Commission for an 824 referral and then to help you understand the potential cost associated with utilizing the donated land for community gardens, I worked with the Director of Parks and Recreation to develop a concept plan, which we shared with your memo on Friday. The plans meant for discussion purposes only. Um, it's provided a basis for a ballpark estimate for cost involved in developing that as a community garden site. Um, the design would allow residents to park near their lots to unload tools and water, as they currently do at the Herbert T Clark House. It would allow for Ada accessible parking and the possibility of accessible, uh, garden plots in the future. It would also provide deer fencing and a, well, a cost could be reduced by approximately $75,000 if the town absorbed the labor and equipment cost. Um, you could also cut off about $50,000 if you did not pave the loop road, but instead opted for gravel. Um, you could also reduce cost by, um, converting the loop road into a two way in and out road with one file of parking along the side. So this is just a concept design to get the discussion started, but it's certainly not a, a final concept. Um. Similarly we also provided ballpark figures for restoration of the house and the barn. So you would better understand the financial commitment involved in preserving those buildings. Um, regarding zone changes, I did lay out options to keep the two new lots in residence a zone. I personally think this is the simpler solution, but of course you could also consider keeping them in the pad rezoning if you'd like. Um, the applicant has worked on draft easements, both access easements and the preservation easement. We're currently working with the town attorney, um, on the language, but I think we're getting very close to language that our attorney feels comfortable with. And I know that, um, the applicant's attorneys are going to review that with you tonight. Um, lastly, our town engineer was out last week and didn't have the opportunity to review the supplemental traffic memo before we sent our, uh, our memo to you on Friday, but he did have a chance to review it today. And he has forwarded his thoughts to you, which I believe were handed out, um, and, and forwarded to you via email. Um, he is satisfied with the information and the recommendations by the applicant at this time. He is not recommending a do not block the box at Worthington, since there have been no previous complaints about blocking of that intersection and the accident history there doesn't really support those changes, but he and Chief Porter agreed that they would monitor the intersection and they could reassess in the future. Um, the town engineer did support the suggested pavement marking improvements to repaint the crosswalk at Addison and Griswold and to stripe a bike shoulder on Addison Road south of the middle school. He thought those would be good additions to the project. He also supports the suggestion that we monitor pedestrian traffic on Eastern Boulevard for a period of time, and then reconsider whether or not an RFP RFP would be appropriate for that crosswalk if pedestrian traffic increases there. Um, lastly, he did weigh in that neither he nor Chief Porter believed that a third party review is necessary for this project, given the relatively straightforward nature of the traffic analysis. Um, and then asked us to share his thoughts with the council. So that's all I had. I'm available for questions either now or after the presentation.

[1:06:23] Thank you. Shelley, do we want to hold off on questions until after the presentation? Okay. Um, what we'll do is we'll allow the presentation to happen. Then we'll open it up to the public for questions, and then we'll move on to councilor questions. Sure.

[1:06:38] Absolutely.

[1:06:39] Thank you.

[1:06:39] All right.

[1:06:39] Great. Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Councilors. Nice to see you all again. For the record, my name is Andre Gomes. I'm an attorney at Hinckley Allen at 20 Church Street in Hartford, Connecticut. With me tonight is my colleague who's also at Hinckley Allen. And my co-counsel, attorney, Megan Hope from Alter Pearson. And Hope right here in Glastonbury. In the room with us, we have Ryan Urgo on behalf of the applicant, Jay Rack. I believe Devin Toohey, also on behalf of the applicant, is on remotely. Um, Andrew Goralski is here directly to my right. He's one of our consultant Consulting civil engineers with SLR and then available remotely is Neil Wolinsky, one of our traffic engineers who's worked on this proposal as well. With that, I'm told this advances the slides.

[1:07:23] Can I interrupt you for one second? Did you say Devin Toohey?

[1:07:25] Yes.

[1:07:26] Okay. I'm going to I just want to make sure he's available here.

[1:07:28] Thank you. So this doesn't seem to be advancing slides. Okay. Perfect. We can keep it there. That was you, right? Not me. Okay. So I'll just be directing the slide advancement. Thank you. So up here on the screen, slide two. And again, for the record, the council just received hard copies of tonight's PowerPoint presentation. Should you want to take any notes. We did submit this to staff in advance. So it's part of the record. You'll also have you also have hard copies of our September 18th supplemental materials package, which we'll be reviewing tonight. I believe that was already shared with the council and its package, its packet, excuse me electronically, but these are the hard copies. So with that I'll start quickly with slide number two, which provides just a general outline of what we're going to address tonight. At the outset, Councilor Nyland said, we're not going to be here until midnight. Right? So taking that to heart, attorney Hope and I are going to endeavor to play counsel and traffic engineer and just general response. So we're going to be handling trading off the presentation to try and kind of move things forward efficiently. But of course, as I said, we have a couple members of SLR should we need to pinch hit, have them pinch hit on anything within their respective area of expertise. And just for the record, all of the traffic materials and engineering materials were prepared by, of course, and in collaboration with SLR. But we're just trying to move things along. So I'm not going to go through this line by line, but it gives the council just a general benchmark and outline of what we're presenting tonight. Next slide please. Okay, great. So I'm going to start first with, I believe it was a question that Councilor Kavanaugh asked at the last public hearing on September 8th. How can Jay Rack honor the legacy and the history of not only the site as a as a farm, but also the Goot family. So what we did was we reached out to the town's GIS coordinator and talked a little bit about the plan. It looks like there's going to be six roadways, separate roadways here that are open for naming, so to speak. So what we did was we proposed a couple of names here. Of course, some of the locations of these specific streets can be shifted if the council wanted, but we have proposed a few to honor the goats. The goat farm, Goat Farm Road, which is that main entry road into the site from Eastern Boulevard. If you were to veer right or south into that townhome community, you're now on Jack's way for Jack goat. Of course, although I'm sure Jack Kemper would like to think it's in honor of him. But it is for Jack goat. Uh, we also have proposed, uh, Meigs Lane, in honor, of course, of the famous corn that has been grown here for a number of years. And Red Barn Court when you get closer to Addison Road. We are also proposing to name the clubhouse, the quote unquote farm, the farm in further homage to the family and the history of the site. We also wanted to pay our respects to the Flanagan family, which of course owns the parcels along Mill Street that are part of this proposal. Unfortunately, Flanagan Way, I believe it is, is already taken in town. I believe that's part of the tannery. For obvious emergency services purposes. You can't do anything similar because you don't want, you know, the fire, fire department going to the tannery when they mean to go here or vice versa. So we looked a little bit into the history and, um, we, of course, the Flanagan family had their, their company, Flanagan Brothers later Flanagan Industries, which eventually grew into a prominent manufacturer of precision components for commercial and military jet engines. So trying to get a little creative here, we have proposed Precision Court as part of the development. If the council is keeping track, we have a question mark where we have one remaining name left up for grabs, so to speak. So we're happy to hear if the council has any feedback on that when we get to councilor. Questions and comments? I am going to oh, okay. That worked. So we've got it. Slide four. And I believe, Mr. Chairman, this is in direct response to your question about let's clarify a little bit of the zoning and the ownership as we're talking about the Addison Road parcels. So what we've submitted, and we submitted a version of this sheet with our September 18th materials. We've color coded it here for purposes of tonight's hearing. So on top in pink, you'll see the area of about 1.62 acres that we're proposing to be donated to the town for use as a community garden or listening to another farmer or gardener in, in town. Uh, miss Caltagirone noted that keeping this in the pad, as she said, could be redundant. So what we've proposed is, just as the council would remain, retain ultimate authority, whether it's in the pad or not. So I think what we've proposed here is keeping it outside of the pad. Just to simplify things. I know we spoke a little bit at the last hearing about rezoning this to reserved land, as the town has with other parcels in in the municipality. So that's the pink area right there. Just below that. The green area is our, of course, proposed pad, which is about 36.11 acres. Um, and Mr. Chairman, directly to your your question about maintenance and zoning, we've proposed to actually extend that pad right up to the Addison Road frontage so that we could continue to own repair, maintain and so on and so forth. The pedestrian easement that we've proposed out onto Addison Road just made it easier without having to enter into easements with the town or potentially a private owner if that were to come about for the area to the south. And then lastly, we have that lot in blue. It's about 1.25 acres. And this is the lot that we're proposing at the council's direction to encumber with a preservation restriction, which attorney Hope will get into shortly. As Shelly mentioned in her memo, it does comply with the minimum zoning requirements for the residents a zone. And because our hope was to eventually treat this like any other single family home in town, of course, with the caveat of the preservation easement. And that, again, attorney Hope will go into this, the preservation easement still gives the council oversight at the end of the day of what happens on site. We're proposing to remove this from the pad just to make if this ultimately ends up going to a single family owner, removing it from the pad and keeping it as residence a. It's a bit hard to see on this screen, but if the council looks. There's kind of a. Later on in the presentation there is a dotted line, the PE residence. A zone line is to the west of this blue parcel, so it's currently residence A, and what we're suggesting is that it remains as residence A. Let me see. Moving on here to the possible community garden plan. Again, this was proposed or prepared by town staff. Um and I believe it was the director of Parks and Rec as I'm not going to rehash it, but as Shelly mentioned, it does include some significant paving around the entirety of the parcel, a well, fencing, some parking at the outset. Um, ultimately it will run the town, as Shelly mentioned, about 350 000, although those costs can certainly be reduced by changing the plan. We have heard that there are other options, certainly on the table, which is just keeping it essentially as kind of a mowed open field and allowing planting in that way, and that would provide more flexibility for two things. For one, if you wanted to ultimately lease this out to a private gardener or farmer to use the entirety of the parcel, and ultimately, if there is some type of agreement could be brokered between the town and Eversource, which again, attorney Hope will get into a little bit later. Um, and then I think that's it. So with that, we're now on speaking of Eversource, I'm going to turn it over to Meg.

[1:15:20] So forward.

[1:15:22] Back highlight.

[1:15:23] Okay.

[1:15:26] Good evening. For the record, my name is Megan Hope. I'm an attorney with Alter Pearson and Hope in Glastonbury. Um, at the last meeting a few weeks ago, I mentioned that I had reached out to Eversource on a couple of occasions about that lot to the north. Um, I actually, um, magically sort of got a call last Thursday afternoon from someone from Eversource. Uh, his name was Michael Green. He's with their real estate department. and we. I explained to him that we were doing a zoning application. Um, on the farm that there was a lot to the north that Richard had been farming. Uh, that his dad had received permit permission. And there were some questions if the town took over this parcel, if they would be able to enter into an agreement, potentially with Eversource to continue farming it. So what what he told me, uh, first of all, was that there was no existing license for Richard to be able to farm that area and that whoever was farming, it was trespassing. It, um, so I told him, okay, well, he's trying to retire and, you know, do this development. So hopefully that shouldn't be an issue anymore. I did say that his dad, Jack had received permission. Um, so he sort of started with that tone. Um, but then when we talked a little further and I started asking him some more questions, um, uh, what he indicated was, is they have that existing row of power lines on the north side of that lot. He said they typically don't like to have uses underneath because sometimes in the future they need to add additional rows of power lines, potentially. Um, I mentioned to him that I had a client in Rocky Hill who had got an easement to pave underneath the lines and park. So I said, you know, why would Eversource let him do that, but not let anybody farm here? And he said, well, sometimes we treat commercial areas different than residential areas. And then he said, you know, if we don't like people farming, because if we have to go in and do emergency work, then we're ruining crops. But by the end of the conversation, I felt like he had softened a little bit of his position, where he started, where we were trespassing and we needed to leave. So I do think that there is potentially an opening for the town. If you guys do end up taking this parcel and, um, doing it as a community garden, I don't think they would allow any type of structures in there probably. Um, but if it's just sort of plots that people are gardening, it might be an option. So anyways, that's the update I have update from Eversource. It was a yeah, I was excited to get to get a call back. Okay. All right. So we're going to move into the two easements that I've been working on since the last meeting. The first is the declaration of easements, covenants and preservation restrictions. That's for that 1.25 acre parcel that has that existing farmhouse and the existing barn. So what I'm going to show you is just sort of an overview of the relevant terms. And then I'm going to get into some of the schedules that are in the document, which I think are really the critical part to understanding of how this how this will work. So, um, the goal obviously of this document is to preserve that view shed, um, and also maintain those character defining elements of the existing house and barn. Um, knowing in the back of my mind that what we think is ultimately going to happen with this House, it's going to, it's going to continue to be a single family residence. I wanted to make sure that the document would, um, operate in that operate in that way so that somebody owning it would be able to understand the process and how they would renovate it. Because I think everyone who's been inside understands that like there will need to be some serious renovations, I think for before somebody starts living in the house, um, particularly with the bathrooms and the kitchen and just some other items to make it a little bit more modern. So, um, some of these sort of overarching terms. The first is about maintenance. Um, so the grantor, so that's currently would be us once we own it. And if we sell the property to somebody else it would run to them. So the grantor any future owners, they're in charge of ongoing maintenance and repairs and maintaining those historical um and architectural characteristics in permanently. Regarding interior changes, I made a specific carve out for the center chimney in the fireplace. So we're saying that there isn't oversight of interior renovations, except that the center chimney and the fireplace must remain in their historical location and condition. Um, there's no subdivision allowed of the lot and the property. Um. Oh, sorry. And for any new construction or additions, um, those need to get the prior written consent of the grantee. And so I'll have my next slide sort of explains how that that's going to work. Okay. For permitted uses, we're proposing that it would remain in the residence a zone. So that means all the um restrictions and uses that are permitted in the residence zone would, would apply to this. So it would be that single family use and any permitted accessory uses that are allowed. Um any future transfer of this lot would require um this preservation easement to be recited in the deed. So every six successor owner after that is going to have that and it's going to run with the land in perpetuity. Okay. So this is a section that I think really gets to the crux of what the council is interested in is, uh, exterior changes to the existing house and to the existing barn. Um, so what I proposed in this, um, section was that the grantor or its successors or assigns, um, shall not make or permit or cause any exterior alteration, uh, additions, modifications or other changes to that existing house or the existing barn without prior express written consent of the grantee acting through its duly authorized representative. And so I defined what that written consent means so that the homeowner can really understand what that process is. Um, and so I said such written consent should be obtained from the Director of Community development. Following the submission of plans and specifications for the proposed exterior changes, together with a written report prepared by a qualified historic consultant, demonstrating that the exterior changes are consistent with the U.S. Secretary of Interior's standards for treatment of historic properties and, to the extent applicable, the Glastonbury Historic District guidelines and maintain the character defining elements, which are noted in schedules B and C of the document. So just to back up a little bit, the way I sort of framed this, um, provision was similar to how you would, um, process something in a historic district, which you typically would come in with your architect, with your proposed plans, and then also your historical consultant who's following these federal guidelines and rehabilitation. Um, our historic guidelines are very much, um, similar to the NPS standards. So that's why we included those in there, but that's really how I came, came up with that provision. Okay. And so that provision references that we need to any changes need to be consistent with those character defining traits. Um, and what I wanted to do is really paper and explain what those traits are. So, um, in draft schedule B and draft schedule C, which I'll show you in a minute. What I did is I just, um, pulled the pictures, put them into the agreement, and then I've identified what those character defining features are. I worked with our architect, Jack Kemper, who's familiar with those standards, and we wrote out those, um, onto the picture. So this is that picture. Um, that was from between 1935 and 1937 of the existing house. And we're showing those important features, which is the center brick chimney, the peaked roof, and the pitch of the peaked roof that it's a two and a half story building. We have the Continuous overhangs that are located at the top of the windows on the first floor here, and then also at the bottom of the peaks here. So those continue around. And then we also have those nine windows on the front. Um, they're 12 over eight windows and they're a little bit small. So I've identified all those character defining traits. And then I also listed those character defining features as well. I always get nervous that parts of agreements will get lost. So I thought maybe a chart might help them not get lost. So I've listed both for the house and the barn. What were those character defining elements? So we have the roof shape, which is a gable and the cornice detail for the house, the roof pitch, the center chimney, the height, the massing of it, those nine windows on the front with the 12 over eight windows and those continuous overhangs on the first floor window heads, and then at the base of the side gables, and then also the clapboard siding as well. And then for the barn, um, again, the roof shape, which is a gable with a simple cornice, the pitch, um, the two stories. And then we also noted the vertical siding and the ventilator slashed hinge vent doors. So sort of tobacco parts that open and close. So we've did I say that right, John? I said like, okay, you're laughing. Yeah. I wasn't sure if anybody knew I had to Google that to write something in there. Okay. So then I also went out and took pictures of all sides of the house. And these would also be attached to the agreement, but I thought it was, um, we have that old picture, but it's only showing the one side of the house or really two sides of the house. And this I'm trying to show a 360 with these pictures. So again, I'm, I'm calling out the continuous overhang. Oh, sorry. This one I meant to do the continuous overhang here. We've got, I took pictures of the front door and the trim the 12 over eight windows. I did take a picture of this later edition, the which is located on the side of the house. You can see that sort of over here as well. We've labeled this main portion of the house as a character defining portion of the property, but we've indicated that this addition is not a character defining aspect of the house. All right. And you can see this a little bit more from the back, where you can see that these later additions, this back porch. And then we have additions one here and one here as well. So we've indicated that these additions, the later additions are not character defining, but the main house is. And then again, I just took a picture of the side of the house over here showing the overhangs and also the later additions which you can.

[1:26:10] I pause you for a moment, please, with these non characteristic. Um, will they remain so. Do you have intentions of removing them.

[1:26:19] So uh yeah. With a non character defining portion of a building they're treated differently in those secretary of the interior standards. So um it's it's uh, it is something you could touch and rebuild, but it still would be, uh, need to be consistent with the standard. So when I was honestly talking about it with Jack Kemper, he says his house looks exactly like this. It has this main block building, the original house. And when he bought his house, he had an El. He had an addition like we have here. And he said when he needed to modernize for a master bedroom and a kitchen, he took down the El, rebuilt it. So it was, you know, consistent and it looked very nice. But that was the part that got rebuilt. We're not really going to be allowed to touch that massing of the main building. So I think it's possible it could be taken down and then rebuilt. Um, yeah, that's how that's where I think that if somebody was modernizing this house, they would add an addition, you'd add it on the side or you'd add it on the back. The standards of the the secretary are very specific that any additions have to be subservient to that character defining and have to. So therefore they're usually in the back or on the side.

[1:27:35] Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. I did also take pictures of the barn on all four sides. Um, again, just to have pictures of of what that looks like. Obviously it's simple, but this was just more to memorialize, uh, what that looks like as well. Okay. Then the next document I worked on. Oh, sorry. And just to back up, I did draft the whole, uh, preservation easement. Sent it to the town attorney. We've been going back with red lines. Um, so we are getting close on that, and I should have a sort of agreed upon draft soon. Um, with the public access easement, I did draft it, but Ken did not have a chance to look at it before he went on vacation. So I'm going to give you an overview, but the town attorney has not fully reviewed this document. But it's a little more straightforward. So this is a map of our proposed public access easement. And just to orient everybody. Addison's road is over to the right side of your screen. Eastern Boulevard is over to your left side of the screen. What we've highlighted in blue is the proposed public access easement. We have the sidewalk portion that's coming from Addison over here. And then when we get to this section, we've highlighted both the road and the sidewalk along the road. Obviously, bikes would probably be in the road, but a pedestrian would be on the sidewalk. So we've put that blue crosshatch over the road and the sidewalk once you get off the pedestrian path. Um, the purpose, obviously of the public access easement is to create that public pedestrian and bicycle connection from Addison Road through our pad over to Eastern Boulevard so that people can go further if they'd like, down National Drive and pick up the, um, the multi-use trail that will bring you to the center of town. Um, for ours, I'm proposing that it's only the public is only going to have access from dawn to dusk. We really want this closed like after the sun goes down. Sort of consistent with how town parks operate. I'm indicating no motor vehicles, including obviously no cars or anything like that, but also no scooters or electric bikes, ATVs or golf carts. I will note that when I was going around taking all these pictures the other day and I was at Smith Middle School, I wanted to see what signs they had at their trailhead. I did see that there was like tons of like electric scooters parked at the bike rack. So I don't know what the town's position is with that on your. Anyway, so anyways, I'll just put that I put no electric bikes, but if we need to modify that, we can. Um, we obviously if somebody had some other type of mobility device, like a wheelchair or something like that, that's allowed, um, the owner, um, which would be us, uh, retains the right to continue to use the easement for any purpose that it wants. Obviously, we've indicated on our site plan that it's really just for recreational purposes or it's the road. So would we continue to use it for that? We have the ability to grant, um, utility companies rights to install or maintain utilities. We'll definitely have to put an Eversource easement. Typically Eversource just has us put those all through the road. So that would be in the same general vicinity. We would be in charge of all the maintenance and repair for this bike path. Since it's on our property, it would be a permanent easement. Um, it would run with the land and we're not creating a public road, um, by the creation of this easement.

[1:31:01] Okay. So now I'm going to pass it over to Andrea. She's going to go through the traffic.

[1:31:12] Thank you.

[1:31:21] Thank you. Just one moment. I'm just trying to get to the right one.

[1:31:25] All right. Thank you. So we have here on the slide and I couldn't see it from here. Just for the record, slide 16. As Shelly mentioned earlier. And I apologize for the record again. Andre Gomes, counsel for the applicant. Uh, as Shelly mentioned, we did receive an email from town engineer Steven Braun. Um, thank you for him turning that around so quickly after coming back from vacation and arriving to a bunch of paper from us. Um, and the first thing we wanted to highlight here was, of course, how he started. And I won't belabor this, but he agrees that a peer review is not necessary of the traffic study. And he noted that both Chief Porter and he are in agreement on that. And he mentioned that the traffic impacts are relatively minor. They're not complex. And they don't just simply warrant involvement of a third party reviewer, which of course echoes our position from the September 8th meeting.

[1:32:17] All right. So some of and this is where I mentioned earlier through you, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to play a little bit of a traffic engineer just to keep things moving and to try to put kind of a more layperson, non engineer spin, if you will, on, on traffic, given the number of questions that we've received from members of the public specifically. So one of the first things we wanted to address is the why we didn't include the approved main in Griswold development in our traffic study. So typically what happens with any any good traffic engineer, but SLR, of course, included is before they issue a traffic report, as they're collecting information to analyze the traffic impacts of a proposed development, they're going to contact the state and or town or city to figure out what applications or proposals are in the pipeline, what has been approved or is anticipated to be coming down the lane that has not yet been constructed and doesn't physically have cars on the road yet, and of course SLR did that. They contacted the engineering department here in Glastonbury. They also ran through things with Ctdot and ultimately included everything within that scope in the traffic report. The one thing that the town engineer agreed with was that it did not. Given the distance from our proposed site, it did not make sense, nor is it industry standard to include the Maine and Griswold development. It's a little bit hard to see up on the screen, but on the hard copies, our site is obviously in the bottom right hand corner, and the various intersections that are analyzed in our traffic impact study are circled in red. The main and Griswold development is up in the upper left hand side. We're talking about a mile and a half away from the proposed development. And we had mentioned at the last hearing that even if you did include that development here in our traffic impact study, the impact would be de minimis or it would be minimal and at most would include one car every 15 minutes or four cars per peak hour. So recall that the two busiest hours of the day are the AM and PM peak hour, and that's typically what you analyze in a traffic impact study because we want to look at worst case scenario, right? So we mentioned that it would be one car every 15 minutes or four cars during each peak hour. And there was a question, I believe, from a member of the public, how did you come up with that figure? If you're not including it in your traffic impact study, how did you know that there were only going to be four cars per peak hour? Well, we knew that because and I have here up on the screen is an excerpt from the traffic report for the Maine and Griswold development. Again, a little bit difficult to see on the screen, but ultimately what you have here is an analysis. This is done by solely engineering, again, not affiliated with this proposed application that at the Griswold and Route two ramp, the proposed community at Main and Griswold would generate approximately four new trips in the AM and PM peak four or less, so at most four. And again, that's at route two in Griswold. It's not Griswold and Addison. So we thought again, remaining conservative, that worst case scenario, you're going to see at most four trips from this proposed community at the Addison and Griswold intersection. Worst case scenario, but that's where we pulled it. We didn't just make up the number. We did go back and, and pull this information from that application. And of course, four trips, one car every 15 minutes, a de minimis impact and not noticeable to the average driver.

[1:35:54] Now, we did agree, and it was in response to questions from Councilor Wang and other members of the council to take another look at the Addison Road Griswold Street intersection. And there was a lot of discussion about that at the last meeting from certainly members of the public and the council as well. And we wanted to provide some clarity on what the intersection is like today. So attorney Hope went out and being the photographer, went out and took a number of photos and kind of analyzed what we have. And so the intersection is as shown here on the screen, a three way stop controlled intersection. Griswold, of course, runs east to west on the left hand of the screen. Addison runs north to south, but at the intersection, it continues on to the northeast. It veers off to the right and and continues on past the intersection over to the park. Um, there are existing sidewalks, as the council can see on the east side of Addison Road. There are also existing sidewalks on the northerly side of Griswold and Addison at. After you get past the intersection and they are connected by an existing crosswalk. And you can see that here on the screen on the northeasterly leg of um of the Addison Road turn. Once you kind of get past the intersection. They are marked, of course, by crosswalk striping in the roadway and highly visible pedestrian signage. So again, this is one of the photos that attorney Hope took. You can see here, and this is standing on the northerly side of Addison, kind of looking south southwest towards Addison Road. You know, farm would be far, far in the distance. Um, and ultimately you can see here the highly visible pedestrian signage. We do know an attorney hope will get to this a little bit later that the crosswalk, uh, painting is a bit faded. So we suggested that it should be repainted to make it very apparent to pedestrians in the area and not to steal Meg's, uh, wind out of her sails. But we're proposing to actually do that as part of our give to try and help some existing conditions here. And then again, friendly reminder, we're still talking about existing conditions, five years of crash data pulled by the SLR team and of course, reviewed by the town engineer in collaboration with the police Department, confirms that there have been no crashes at this intersection involving pedestrians. So given all of this information and what we're seeing on site today, SLR, together with the town engineer, believe that there's no additional pedestrian improvements needed, of course, except for that restriping of the crosswalk at that area, and also because of the low speeds approaching the all way stop controlled intersection, these features are appropriate and safe for existing pedestrians.

[1:38:40] And I believe, Councilor Gallardo, this was your question. So there was a general question about the impact of parents driving to and from Norbeck Elementary, taking their kids to school in the morning or in the afternoon. And a couple of questions arose from that. So I'm going to take them piece by piece. The first thing I wanted to point out here is actually that there, as I'm sure the council knows, there are alternative routes to Norbeck from our proposed site. Other than going through the Addison and Griswold Street intersection. So the trip between Addison, between the site and Naubuc through Addison and Griswold is about 2.4 miles. Um, but actually, if you were to go out on Eastern Boulevard, go south to Hebron Avenue, then cut through to House Street and eventually to Norbeck. It's a shorter trip. It's about 2.2 miles. Um, typically we anticipate that drivers go the path of least resistance. They're going to take the path that has the least congestion. That's the shorter trip. It's the same thing that Google, Google Maps or Waze does for you. Drivers tend to get into that habit as their traffic or traveling to and from frequent locations. Drivers can also go out onto eastern, uh, to National Drive, then Hebron Avenue, and then of course, continue on to House Street and onto Norbeck. That's about the same distance as going through Addison and Griswold at Roosevelt at 2.4 miles. I think this showed that taking Hebron out to House Street is the shorter in time and distance route. So keeping that in mind, it's not necessarily going to be an Addison Road and Griswold Street intersection given what we've discussed. But in any event, we did want to look at the impact of the proposed community on the Addison and Griswold. And to be clear, a lot of this was already in our materials previously submitted to the council and reviewed by the town engineer. We're just kind of putting a finer point on it and reiterating it in response to questions we received at the September 8th meeting. Um, and, uh, ultimately the punchline here is that we're going to have a minimal impact on the level of service, which again, level of service is a measure of delay, not of safety, which is something important to keep in mind. But I wanted to take just a step back not only for the benefit of the council, but for the benefit of members of the public who questioned these traffic figures at the September 8th meeting. And again, put a non-engineer spin on how we get to these numbers. So ultimately, what we want to establish is we want to establish how many cars are on the roadway today. So SLR collected data regarding existing vehicle trips at this intersection. And they did so by grabbing data from CT dot. They also collected a data via an automated traffic recorder or an ATR that was placed near the intersection. But SLR actually went a step further and went and took a couple months later, manual traffic counts at this intersection, physically counting how many cars you're seeing through this intersection on on a daily basis. What they'll then do is they'll take those figures and they will project them into the future here. Because our study was done in 2025, we projected it out to 2027. And the way you typically do that, Of course, you're adding in those other developments that you know are in the pipeline that have not yet been built. But you typically add on a 1% annual growth rate to that traffic count of existing conditions today. And that 1%, sometimes we get some some scoffing, if you will, for that number. That's not a number that's proposed by the traffic engineer. That's actually a number that's suggested by the Connecticut Department of Transportation when you're trying to project future growth. So SLR went through did the 1%, but we actually got feedback before we issued our traffic study from the town engineer. It may have been Mr. Pennington at the time, but then followed by Mr. Braun, that 1% wasn't conservative enough, and he wanted us to apply a 3% growth rate growth rate. So when you take the existing counts, you add on the the items in the pipeline, so to speak, and you extrapolate that growth rate. That is that background number that you're seeing on the screen. So for here, that's what the council and the town can expect will happen at this intersection in 2027 without this development, what our traffic engineers will do is then they will take the anticipated traffic from the proposed development, and they'll add it on to the background conditions. And that's where we get combined. And the delta is what what's important there, of course, seeing what the impacts are. So, um, and Councilor Gallardo, directly to your question, you asked specifically, do these figures include parents driving their kids to school or teachers driving to the school or whatever it may be? And the answer is yes. A lot of this data and the metrics that traffic engineers are using is from the ITE trip generation manual, which is the industry standard. And that data, I mean, we're on the I'm not going to purport to name the addition, but we're on the umpteenth edition of that IT manual. It collects data from all over the country, and it's been around for for years, if not decades. And it includes all traffic on the roadway. Parents going to school. Amazon deliveries, school busses, emergency services, and so on and so forth. So all of our figures necessarily include that school related traffic, not only to Norbeck, but Smith Middle School. So, um, now as to impact again, staying on this. Slide 22. As you can see on the screen. And again, this goes to to you, Councilor Golota asking about what's happening in the a MPAM peak hour, the busiest hour of the day. Uh, as you can see on the screen, you're looking at in the a m peak hour for that northbound left and right turning movement. So if you're traveling north on Addison and turning either left or right on Griswold or Addison, you're looking at less than one half of a second delay at that intersection post build. So after this community is, is, is constructed and fully occupied, you're looking at about a half a second Additional delay. Again, it's conservative for all of the reasons we previously discussed, but the council will also recall that the town engineer had asked us to rework these numbers, to assume that 20% of the traffic from our proposed community is going to be going through Addison and Griswold. Again, we believe that's conservative, but this is truly a worst case scenario for all of the reasons I discussed. We did, of course, highlight. And you can see in the top right hand corner, the AM peak hour for this intersection is 730 to 830. That directly coincides with the start of school at Norbeck, which is 8:25 a.m. it also coincides, I believe, Smith's Smith Middle School starts at 7:55 a.m. I think I saw. So it encapsulates all of the traffic, of course, going to and from Smith and Norbeck in the area. And I'll also note, of course, that the loss rating for each turning movement in the AM peak does not change from existing conditions. So turning now to the PM peak hour, which again here was was 430 to 530. And we had also looked at the the hour where Smith Middle School is letting out school for the day. I think it's in the 2:30 p.m. range, and I don't think there was any major traffic difference from that peak hour to this peak hour. I believe the PM peak 430 to 530 is actually a bit busier. So we stuck with that because it's the more conservative version. Again, you're seeing in the PM peak delays of um 2.4 seconds or less. The one exception being of course that turning movement, that northbound approach on Addison turning left or right onto Griswold or Addison, respectively. And that's a delay of 12.1 seconds on average. Again, that's 12.1 seconds of additional delay in just the PM peak hour, which is going to be the busiest hour of the day here. Uh, and keeping in mind that the traffic from our proposed community is only going to encompass 1 to 2.5% of the traffic on the roadways at that time. So again, it's an existing conditions issue, not an issue that is created by the proposed community. Um, the town engineer I'm going to go here. So a town engineer, Braun had asked us as a courtesy to kind of put together a schematic design of what an improvement to the Addison and Griswold intersection could look like. And he had actually provided us with a sketch that he did. And sellers, traffic engineering and civil engineering team took a look at that. And this is very similar to what your town engineer had proposed. And it's, again, a little bit difficult to show here on the screen, but ultimately it would require the addition of a second turning lane to, of course, help traffic move through the intersection more quickly. Um, And in order to do that, it would take. And again, this is all subject to confirmation by survey. This was all done using just the information available available to us on publicly available documents or systems like the GIS system. It would require the taking of property from at least one private property owner to provide that turning radius. At the corner of Addison, at the intersection where Addison turns to the northeast. At the intersection, you'd likely need to take property from the corner of that single family residence. Um. At that area, you would need to likely obtain sidewalk and or snow shelf easements from 3 to 4 other property owners in order to enable the expansion of the roadway along Addison Road. And I'll show a photo of that in a second. It would also include the relocation of a fire hydrant, the relocation of existing utility poles at the southwest corner of the intersection and the removal of a very large tree. Again, at that southeast corner of the intersection. This would. This. This proposed schematic design here would improve the overall level of service here from an F to a C. And again, that's existing conditions not taking into account the community. Um and that's an improvement about 48 seconds of less delay if you will in the PM or afternoon peak hour. Uh, and again, hard to read on the screen, but you can see here that Mr. Braun, the town engineer, issued an email today in which again, same email as before, just cropped. Uh, where he, uh, confirmed that the improvement would advance the overall level of service at the intersection and would require property or easement acquisitions and removal of a large tree. Uh, something that he suggests the town consider for future improvement. Um, in this area. I'll go now to, to my I believe my last slide, which is a photo. This is a photo of that sidewalk on the easterly side of Addison. As you can see here, we have a very small snow shelf than the sidewalk and a number of large trees, which likely would also need to be removed to, again, widen that roadway and provide that easement and that sidewalk further to the east to provide that roadway expansion. Um, so ultimately, there are a few things, as I mentioned, including the restriping of the crosswalk that we've proposed to kind of ameliorate the existing conditions in this area. And I'm going to turn it over to Meg to get into that now.

[1:50:29] All right.

[1:50:32] Again, Megan Hope for the record. Um, so in a minute, I'm going to go through a series of four slides that talk about the various off site improvements that we're proposing related to pedestrian and also traffic improvements. Before I went into that, I did just want to quickly review a few provisions of the Pad regulation. Um, since the beginning of this, this Pad application, there's been a lot of discussion about the public benefit. Um, for this project. And, and even though I do pad applications a fair amount, I always like to go back and reread the regs multiple times while I'm doing an application. Um, and when I was looking at them earlier, um, there was just a couple items that I wanted to pull out to provide some context as we go through these off site improvements. So at the top of your screen is section 4.1, 2.3, C one, which is your residential unit density section that indicates, you know, based on the underlying zone, what's the maximum dwelling units per acre. Um, and then that middle section that I have on the screen is a separate section or underneath that for 123C1B which talks about exceptions to that unit. Unit density provision above. And this is the provision that talks about um a significant public benefit. And what it says is that the council at its sole discretion based on a finding of a significant public benefit, may allow one additional dwelling unit for each acre of property defined as unbuildable property. If the land is dedicated to the town and accepted by the town council. Um, and then it goes on in the last paragraph or the last sentence of that section. It says prior to finding a prior to a finding of significant public benefit, the town council, at a minimum, shall consider how the project protects and promotes the public health, safety or welfare and sound planning and community esthetics. Um, now we're not applying under that provision of the Pad regulations. We're getting our, um, unit density from the provision that's at the bottom of your screen, which is a totally separate section, which has to do with the affordable dwelling units. Um, so I put that at the bottom of, of the page there that section 41232 B, which has to do with your affordable pads. Um, and that provides that a pad that provides 20% or more of the total proposed units as, as affordable dwelling units and an underlying rez, a zone, um, serviced by water and sewer are allowed a density of not more than six dwelling units per acre, per acre. So I just wanted to, um, I feel like perhaps we're conflating these two regulations, um, notwithstanding that we still are providing a lot of public benefits, which I'm going to go through in a minute, but I just wanted to point that out because I feel like we've been talking about it a lot. And I just wanted to make it clear with the council which provision we're applying under. Okay. So now I'm going to go through each of these off site, uh, proposed, a public improvements. I'm going to start at the intersection with eastern Addison and Smith's Middle School. So to orient you, Addison Road is running in the center of your screen. North southeastern is over on the west or left side of the screen, and Smith's Middle School is on the right or east side. So starting at that northerly leg, we're restriping, uh, that portion of the road to add an additional lane there, uh, headed in the southbound direction that will help with the existing queuing that's there. Now, um, we're also proposing to, um, enhance the radius over on that northeast section of the intersection. That's going to allow better turning radius for busses as they exit the site. We are striping also this pavement right here, uh, to delineate that there's a straight and left turning movement and then a designated right turning movement as well. And then on the southerly side, we are striping the center portion of the road right here just to provide some more definition between the two travel lanes. Moving now to the next proposed off site benefit. We have, um, the section of Addison Road between the Smith Middle School exit, which is up at the top of the screen over here. This is the Smith Middle School exit. And then if you recall, our public access easement starts right at the sort of bottom of this red box. So what we're proposing to do is stripe those shoulders between basically that Smith Middle School leg and then where our public access easement starts. The town engineer, uh, noted to us, um, following the last meeting that there's currently just that center line stripe. There's no shoulder stripes. He thought that pedestrians or bicyclists might feel safer if there had, if there was some more definitions, um, at the edge of the road. So we're proposing to stripe those, uh, both for pedestrians Coming from Smith to our site and then going back the other way on the right side of your screen. I just have an aerial view of the intersection of Addison Road and Worthington Road. Um, as you may recall from the town engineer's email, we proposed to potentially paint a don't do not block the box at this location. Uh, that was not something that Steve felt comfortable with. And he indicated in his, in his memo, um, the following and I'll just read it. He said I had a chance to review the applicant's, uh, recent, uh, transmittal. I discussed the do not block the box markings on Addison Road near Worthington, near the Worthington intersection with Chief Porter. And he doesn't see a demonstrated need for this item based on the limited traffic volumes on Worthington and a lack of past complaints or accident history at this intersection. Um, this is something we recommend the Town monitor for consideration in the future. So we we had mentioned in our materials, we're comfortable with, um, painting it on, but the town engineer, uh, doesn't think that that's necessary at this point. Uh, at that northeast corner of the pad, uh, we're proposing improvements at Addison Road. So we obviously have our public access easement and our sidewalk coming out to Addison Road. We're proposing a small section of sidewalk in the town. Right of way. We're proposing a crosswalk to the east side of Addison, because there are existing sidewalks on the east side of Addison's. We're connecting to that network, and we're also proposing that RFP, that, um, rectangular rapid flashing beacon so that anyone walking can hit that, um, and, uh, get the cars to stop to them so they can cross. Okay. Now moving over to the improvements, um, at Eastern Boulevard. So just to reorient you, I'm now on the west side of the site on Eastern Boulevard. We have the site main site driveway right here. The clubhouse is over here to the top of your screen. What we're proposing to do is build a sidewalk off our site. So we're building a sidewalk all on our frontage to the north, which leads to nowhere, but we're building it all on our frontage. And then to the south, we're connecting down to the existing crosswalk that crosses eastern and brings you over to that existing sidewalk network on National Drive. So we have a couple hundred feet of sidewalk that we're proposing to bring down and connect to that existing crosswalk. I know there were some questions at the last meeting regarding, um, potentially needing another RFP at this location. So I just wanted to go back through some of the data because we did collect data on pedestrian crossings. So, um, the DOT recommends a minimum of 20 pedestrians crossing. An hour before you would put in an RFP. And what they. They're looking for is they want to make sure that they're effective. And if you're not having a lot of people crossing and people aren't hitting the button, then they become ineffective. Really. So what we did is we, uh, we went out and actually counted how many people are using that existing crosswalk. Um, it's only one person in the peak hour, which kind of makes sense because it's not really connected to anything if you think of that crosswalk. Um, I think a lot of people walk from the medical buildings on their lunch break, but they're really already on the other side of the street. And so they don't really need to cross. So we're getting one pedestrian in the peak hour. We did project, uh, the total number of pedestrians in the peak hour based on our development. And again, we use those standard ITE rates for pedestrians and we get between 9 and 13 pedestrians per hour. So that's still under the 20 pedestrian threshold for Dot. So we were not proposing to put in the RFP at Eastern Drive, but we are amenable to, um, a condition of approval that we could monitor the pedestrians after the project is built to see if we are hitting that 20 pedestrian per hour number. And that was something that we had included in our materials. And again, that was something that the town engineer supported and his email, he said the applicant suggestion for future post build pedestrian counts at the Eastern Boulevard pedestrian crossing to verify the need for an RFP is also reasonable, and such improvement could be bonded if necessary. So that's how we would propose a sort of address that in the future to see if we're generating pedestrians that would hit the threshold in order to install it. Okay. We did have a question at the last meeting regarding rents. Obviously we had submitted an affordability plan as part of our application. Um, we do, uh, we're again, if you remember, we have three bedroom units for the whole development. Um, those affordable units are adjusted per year based on the annual incomes in the state and in the geographic area. But anyways, uh, $2,509 per month is what an affordable unit would rent for the market rate units already obviously driven by the market. I actually went online today, apartments.com typed in three bedroom unit and the one Glastonbury place popped up. So I just screenshotted this and put it in the, uh, in the PowerPoint. So they currently have a three bedroom that's listed. Um, and that's for 4200, $4,210. So we think our market rates are going to be somewhere between $3,500 a month and $4,300 a month, but comparable to what we're seeing at some of these other apartments in town. Okay. Okay. This is a rendered plan of Eastern Boulevard. So again, to orient you, Eastern Boulevard is on the left side of your screen. We have our main site access there, and then the proposed amenity building at the top of the screen. Shelley did reach out to the superintendent of schools regarding the bus stop. Um, he indicated that there would likely be one bus stop. They would stop on Eastern Boulevard and that they would like some type of bus shelter ala what they have at Hale farms. Um, on Eastern Boulevard for the students. We did ask if the students could wait in the clubhouse. There's also, um, a, uh, if you look over here, this, this little pull off areas where the male kiosk would be. So we asked even if the bus could pull in there. And, um, we have a little roof on that male kiosk. Um, but they indicated no, that the bus wants to stay on Eastern Boulevard, so I think we can continue to coordinate with them. I don't know if they like, you know, which direction they're going to be driving the bus in and where exactly it's going to stop. If it makes it more sense to have the the bus shelter on the north side of our site drive or the south. But I think we can continue to speak with them about that. Okay. So even though I went through the whole regulations about the public benefits, um, not being a requirement of the type of pad or, um, applying for, I still wanted to go through the public benefits because we have a lot of them and we've been obviously talking about it for months and months and months. So I've already gone through obviously the, all the off site improvements, uh, the new repainted crosswalk at Addison Road, the new, um, rr, FB crosswalk and sidewalk by Addison Road and Addison Pond. Um, we have an agreement to install the RFB at Eastern Boulevard if we're showing those pedestrian counts. Two years. Um, Uh, post, uh, post development. Uh, we're extending that sidewalk on Eastern Boulevard off our property to go down and connect to that existing crosswalk and sidewalk network. Um, we're restriping on Addison Road, um, Eastern Boulevard and Smith Middle School to add that additional turning lane and fix the radius as it exists. Currently, we are, um, striping those shoulders between Smith Middle School and our public access easement, uh, to just create a more defined area for bikers and pedestrians. And, uh, those are all the off site improvements from an on site perspective. I think it's important to note the, the increase in the variety of housing types we're adding to this. It's I've never done a project that's done this many three bedroom units. And I think that that's something that's definitely needed. If I looked, I looked back at the tannery, um, which we did ten years ago now that had 250 units, only three bedrooms at all those. I looked back at one Glastonbury place that had 145 units, only five three bedrooms. So we're definitely adding a product that hasn't been built. And I think that's really important for housing diversity. Um, again, we had mentioned the soil remediation at 25 Mill Street and whether that counted as a public benefit or not, one thing I'd like to point out is this whole area of town is located in a groundwater protection zone. So I do think it's a public benefit to remediate soil, remove impacted soil, so that it doesn't have any ability to leach into the groundwater. Because if you're in a groundwater protection zone, then you are in an area that people could install wells for drinking water. Um, we are proposing the split rail fence along the northerly portion of our pad. And along that southerly portion of the parcel, we're proposing to donate to the town to delineate those two. That was at the request of the town engineer. We're proposing a timber guardrail in front of the town's proposed donated piece so that cars aren't driving into it. That's shown on our plans. I did want to also point out the nine acre conservation easement that's running north to south, and then along salmon Brook. You have sort of continuous public conservation easements to the north and also to the south. Salmon Brook is a very protected watershed important in town. And this conservation easement is is definitely an enhancement ecologically to what's happening there. The new public access easement through the proposed community, we think, is obviously a public benefit because it provides an alternate safe access if you're using the town's trail system. And then finally, the preservation restriction for the existing house. The neighbors, I think, made it very clear how important it was to maintain the house and that view shed from Addison Road. So I think that that I wanted to underscore that point and the work that we've been doing with the preservation easement, uh, to maintain, maintain that viewsheds for the neighbors. Um, and finally, as I approach my last couple of slides, um, I did want to acknowledge the architecture for our development. I know the meeting went very late, um, at the last meeting a few weeks ago, but, um, I just wanted to conclude with the two renderings that we had prepared. We went to so many meetings with the A, S, C, or C, and we really fine tuned the site design and all the architectural components and details of our proposed plan. Um, I understand, I think more than anyone, the super high expectations that this town sets for architecture and any new developments or redevelopment. And I felt like our team was very responsive, met all the design guidelines that have been established and just really hit a home run with the architecture. When you have a pad, you obviously have so much flexibility from what you can do. From a massing standpoint, we could have built, you know, huge apartment buildings, but I think the applicant really understood what this neighborhood needed from a design standpoint and built something very contextual and something that really blends with that existing and established residential neighborhood, um, on Addison Road. So I did just want to bring that up with some of the final images, um, that we prepared. And then finally, um, this was something we had talked about at the end of the, the town planning and zoning meeting about a month ago now. Um, that commission felt that our plan really honored the Goutte family. They felt that it was a very positive project, that it was a good development and felt that this really honored the Goutte family legacy. And I think that, um, one thing that's important to remember in all of this is that, um, Richard would like to retire. And I think that part of this project is sort of honoring his legacy by allowing him to move forward with his retirement. So with that, that concludes our presentation. And Andrea and myself and the team can answer any questions from the council or the public.

[2:08:25] Thank you. Um, I'm going to open it up to the public at this time. Uh, Rob Smith, you're the first one on my list.

[2:08:34] Rob, can you please just state your name and address for the record? And if you can keep it to five minutes, would be appreciated. Good evening. Rob Smith from.

[2:08:41] 100 Edison Road. Uh, tonight I'm asking you to reconsider refusing the donation of the farmhouse, the red barn, and the lettuce field. Um, this issue is of paramount importance to the residents of the North End and Addison Road coalition. We did have a few other members who were going to speak on this that had to leave already. Um, but I left that September 8th hearing disappointed at that late night, 8 to 1 informal vote, where almost none of you even explained why you wanted to refuse the donation. Um, you know, we voted 6 to 2 to spend $600,000 on dredging the Connecticut River to benefit boat owners. Um, but we're not accepting a free donation of these assets that are in good condition, and they have significant historical and monetary value. So since September 8th, I've learned that some of you genuinely believe that accepting these assets would saddle the town with unacceptable financial obligations. Um, but it would not do that. Um, you might have been scared by the $2 million figure from the historical society. Uh, but just remember, that was someone's rough estimate of what it would cost to fully restore the buildings. I believe, turn the barn into a wedding venue and create an $800,000 endowment. Not an analysis of what the town would be required to spend if you accept the donation. Um, so I'd ask if we accept the donation, is the town obligated to spend $2 million, or is it obligated to spend anything at all? What work is required that would cost money? How much would that cost? What needs to happen now? What could happen 510 years from now? And would the town even be the ones paying for any of that? Or would a preservation partner be paying for it? And has anyone even run those numbers? Um, we need to put more diligence into this. We've seen the community garden plan, the barn. It could complement those gardens, provide space for classes, storage events, scout meetings, other uses. We need to study that house and figure out what what it contains, how valuable that that really is. I think the historical society kind of dropping out was a surprise to some of us, but it doesn't change the value of the buildings to the residents of the North End or to the town. Um, after the society dropped out, uh, are we just not going to try to find another preservation partner or we're just going to kind of give up and say, oh, well, you know, they're not going to do it, so there's no one else would do it. Um, no, we should accept the barn, uh, the house, the whole gift, buy ourselves some time for free, and then put out an RFP to see who else might have interest. Here's another option. If, uh, we could do a hybrid to the hybrid. So if you just think that accepting one piece like the farmhouse, for instance, feels too difficult or too costly, you could just split them up except the barn and the lettuce field and allow Jack to sell the house. Um, it's not all or nothing. This would give the town the house's property tax revenue. We'd get the farmable lettuce field and the multi-purpose barn. But I again would say accept all of it. We don't need the full plan right now because we're not paying for anything. We need time, and accepting this donation gives us time. I know you'll say, you know, don't worry, we've got the preservation easement. Um, you know, I know they've put a lot of work into that, but if we refuse the donation, the easement does not stop someone from purchasing the house who's not capable of taking care of it, or the barn. We're not interested in doing that. So we could someone might show up who just sees an inexpensive fixer upper and, you know, lovely Glastonbury and doesn't really pay attention to that or glosses over it or minimizes it. Um, and then, you know, we've lost, we've lost them. So if you refuse the pre-revolutionary farmhouse, that means you're okay. If it never gets any type of proper historical inventory or evaluation, we never learn what's behind the walls or under the, under the floors. Um, like any property, I'm sure there's ongoing expenses like insurance Groundskeeping electricity. I know you're wary of those costs. I am am excited. I think we have a coalition member on Zoom who you'll hear from who will hopefully make your decision easier. Um, but please reconsider re vote and accept these valuable assets. We want to retain control over their future and not, you know, leave it up to chance. You're not committing spending Anything you're not committing, uh, putting the town in any type of untenable financial position. If you still are going to vote against accepting the assets this time, please explain your reasoning and specifically what expenses you believe the town is going to incur that outweigh the assets value. Thank you.

[2:13:16] Thank you. Rob. Uh, Suzanne Sant'Angelo.

[2:13:24] No, no. Uh, that's the only two names I have on the list. But if anyone else would like to come up and speak before us, uh, please feel free to come on up.

[2:13:46] Hi. My name is Sherry Dyson. I'm from 53 Norman Drive. And I just agree with what Rob just said, and encouraged the town Council to accept the gift of the house and barn and the lettuce fields, that it would really benefit the town. And that's all I have to add.

[2:14:09] Thank you. Sherry.

[2:14:15] Anyone else? S1:

[2:14:17] Anyone on Zoom? S3:

[2:14:32] Can you hear me?

[2:14:33] I can.

[2:14:34] Okay. My name is Art Burrows. Address is 201 Racket Club Court in Hinsdale, Illinois. 60521. Um, so I've spoken with Rob for a bit on on the project. Um, and thought I'd give you a little bit of background and a proposal to maybe provide some time to come up with some some options if you were to accept the donation. So a little background. Um, I grew up in Fairfield, uh, attended, uh, UConn, an undergraduate degree in accounting, uh, graduate degree in real estate and finance, uh, lived in Glastonbury upon graduation from UConn, uh, moved around to through a couple of condo projects there and then, uh, relocated to Chicago. Um, and we'll be relocating back to Glastonbury, uh, probably by the first quarter of next year. I've got a family there. Uh, the driving force here is two, two grandchildren. Um, and I've been on the, uh, the real estate side raised about two, completed $2 billion in capital markets transactions. My focus after I moved back will be to identify donation sources, capital sources to support the preservation of historic structures. I think you've gone through the nothing that I can add as to the value historic value of the properties here. The objective, I guess, would be to preserve the view shed to maintain the historic character of that area. Um, and my understanding is that that the village or the town is not willing to take on any financial obligation, future obligations associated with the project. Um, the financial obligation from my understanding is, has not been well defined. I think it was estimated maybe at $2 million, which was um, barn renovation and farmhouse renovation. Um, what I had proposed or, and proposing would be to fund an escrow that would carry the covering, carry insurance, electric groundskeeping, snow removal, and then professional services to put together, um, options. Um, for the project. Uh, the dollar amount would be, I would assume it could be for 24 months, would carry 24 months or so and put $50,000 in an escrow that could be drawn on to cover those costs. The objective would be that during that 24 month period, there'd be no costs to the, um, to the town. Um, and that assumes just that there's no preservation work to be done, but just basically maintain maintenance of the existing projects. Uh, key key objective during that, uh, two would be one to, to identify the development options. And then two would be, um, the fundraising effort to secure adequate donations to, cover the costs. The renovation costs. Once a. You know, I think once we had a good idea on what the options might be and what those associated costs would be.

[2:17:59] The objective is again, to buy some time to, um, to come up with some plans and to fund those, uh, um, uh, the preferred options, preferred option.

[2:18:17] Is that it, Mr.

[2:18:19] Burrows? S18:

[2:18:19] Okay. Thank you very much.

[2:18:23] Um, if anyone else would like to join us on Zoom, we have one more chance to raise your hand.

[2:18:31] I have no one else, Mr. Chairman.

[2:18:33] Thank you. Mary. Uh, what did we have for public comment?

[2:18:35] There were eight public comments that were.

[2:18:37] Sent in and are included in the packet.

[2:18:40] Thank you very much. I'll return back to the public for one more chance. If you'd like to come up and speak before us.

[2:18:50] Seeing no more. Then I will turn to counselors for questions.

[2:18:56] Tom.

[2:18:59] I guess one question I would have is, if my colleagues do not act to preserve or have the town own the house and the barn. I understand you have a preservation condition.

[2:19:23] Who gets the money from the sale of the house? S4:

[2:19:26] So I would just share with my colleagues is that if you accepted the house and the barn and after due diligence, decided that you couldn't retain it, the town would sell the house and the barn and the proceeds would go to the town. Just an observation. Um.

[2:19:51] I'm fascinated with traffic studies and engineers. I really wonder what they drink. Um, you know, I would agree that your development probably isn't going to add much more water to a full glass, but it's that whole notion of when the glass becomes so full that it overflows that you need to then acquire property and take down an old tree, and it's going to be the town spending millions of dollars to correct the intersection. And I guess my comment is sort of directed to the town manager in terms of thinking forward, in terms of we should really try to avoid that. And that that cost, which I don't think is going to be shifted to you, gets shifted or at least becomes a partnership as opposed to 7 or 8 years or nine years from now when the Cup so overfloweth that something dramatic is going to need to be done there. And it's just so.

[2:21:12] I'd use an obscenity, so I'll avoid it. My comment for Megan would be, remember that a PAD is totally at the discretion of the council, and so that it really is advisable to come in to make an argument. Why you need to basically ignore all the existing zoning to do something special and. And I'll just leave that at that for now.

[2:21:41] Additional questions. Larry.

[2:21:44] Um, yeah. First to the town manager. Going back to the discussion about, uh, the home. And were we to accept it, can you go on about what the maintenance would be on a regular basis, what the personnel costs would be on a regular basis? Do we have the personnel to handle that? Because it's not going to be. Just take it and let it sit and wait. Um, if you can talk about all the things that would be involved in that. So we are aware and what the town, the town's capabilities would be.

[2:22:17] Well, a lot of it depends on the use. So if we simply get the property and we don't rent it, we don't allow people to go in it. There would be the added insurance cost. There'd be the heating and heating costs, there would be the costs associated with mowing the property and costs associated with, you know, have a leak, you still need to repair it. So things of that nature, um, if it's rented, of course, then there are costs associated with making it presentable to rent. It is in my opinion, not presentable to rent having walked through that property needs, I think significant renovations, interior renovations. Um, I think it needs exterior renovations as well. That's just my understanding of having walked through it with my staff, walked through it with the building official, walked through it with Shelly Caltagirone, our director of planning and community development. Um, and so those are, I think the costs vary depending on the use. Um, and, um, maybe down the road, once it gets to be presentable for rent, there could be, um, you know, income associated with renting, but with, you know, you also have what comes with those that rental income demands. So there's the upkeep of the property, as I mentioned, and it's meeting the demands of the renter. Um, and so that's in a nutshell, how I, how I see it depends on the use. And there would be some costs, even if the use is low costs.

[2:23:50] Escalate the ongoing upkeep of the barn also. Right.

[2:23:54] Yeah. I, you know, with respect to the barn, I mean, my initial reaction would just to bar the doors and don't let anyone inside that barn and, uh, as a safety concerns and, you know, try to keep the rain out and the wind out and over time, if that's something the town wants to preserve or let the public go in and we'd, we'd prepare cost estimates to, you know, to facilitate that.

[2:24:22] Thank you. Um, also to attorneys Combs and to attorney Hope and to everyone else that's been involved in this project. Um, Regardless of what we all may think, myself included. I mean, we all have, you know, nine different opinions here. Um, I want to thank you for what you've done so far. Um, it's we have people who come in who want to do developments and they don't want to work with us and they want what they want. And I get that. And you have worked with the neighbors. It's been amazing. Um, I can't thank you enough. I think that means the world to these folks and to us too. You've been great to work with. I personally do appreciate all the public benefit that you are putting forward in this, and I'll leave that at that.

[2:25:20] Thank you.

[2:25:23] Jonathan.

[2:25:23] I recall that when we reroofed the barns down at the school, the total cost was 150,000, give or take.

[2:25:33] Do you happen to recollect that? S5:

[2:25:36] Just FYI, that's my belief. Um, could you refresh my memory as to the number of units by type? How many? One, two and three. Four.

[2:25:46] Five bedrooms? S14:

[2:25:48] Bedrooms.

[2:25:48] It's all three bedrooms.

[2:25:50] Correct.

[2:25:50] And then you provided some information on we had asked about the number of school children, and you provided a table. And I tried to figure it out from that table exactly what it meant. Okay. And it looked to me like, correct me if I'm wrong, this table that you provided would seem to indicate you expect 256 people in this complex.

[2:26:16] Uh, so I'll hit on that counselor. So at this. You're speaking about the school age children again, rough estimate that we have at tab one of our just to guide the council September 18th submission. Um, on page two. So again, the discussion about school aged children was in reference to the traffic impacts of having children in the development and whether or not it's included in all of our traffic impact study. I'll just remind the council that considering the impacts of school children, not a legally proper consideration in a zoning application, but in any event, we wanted to take a look and provide the council with a number. I think, Councilor Osgood, you had specifically asked, so historically, what we would look at, um, in the industry is something called the Rutgers study. I think there's been a couple of iterations of that comes out from Rutgers University, and it generally provides, I believe, nationally collected data about school aged children in, um, different types of residential communities throughout the country. So we took a look at the Rutgers study, the so-called multipliers. We pulled the most recent ones available. And when you break down again, 61 townhomes, 96 duplex units that gets you to the 157. When you break it down and look at how they are defined, and you do that math and insert the joke about making a lawyer do math, you eventually get to just over 55 anticipated school aged children in the community. More recently, Southeastern Council of Governments has issued its own multipliers, which I haven't been able to really dive into it. But as I understand it, they kind of started with Rutgers and then added or or supplemented with Connecticut specific data. When you take those values and apply what we have here the 61 townhomes, the 96 duplex units, you and I can't explain the jump, but the anticipated estimate is 139 school children. We believe that that's excessively high for what we're anticipating the market to be for these proposed residential units. But that's that's the range. I will note that this does not include folks who already live in Glastonbury and are either already having children in the school system and choose to move, or have children who have been considered by the school district. You know, kids who are not yet five years old and in the public school system, they don't count. Those folks who are have children younger than five and are not yet counted in the school matriculation numbers for this community, but are kind of thought about and planned for by the Superintendent and Board of Education.

[2:28:53] So to my point, if you have somewhere between 55 and 139 students, it certainly would seem to make sense to require a bus shelter for the kids out on Eastern Boulevard. But then on the section, tab five, you look at all persons in unit total persons.

[2:29:17] Does that have any bearing to the number of people that we expect in this complex? S13:

[2:29:43] Yeah. Okay. But again, it also relates to traffic. But that table seems to indicate total persons aged zero through 75 plus. And it gives a number for total persons. This is tab five I'm referencing.

[2:29:55] Yep I see.

[2:29:56] That. And if you add all those together I get 256.

[2:30:00] Again. I could run those numbers counselor if I'm sorry.

[2:30:05] So half our school aged children.

[2:30:06] Yeah, I suppose so. But in any event, keep in mind we're talking about two separate buckets of information. These are multipliers that are kind of used to assist folks in anticipating school age children and number of folks. Generally what you do when you're looking at a traffic impact study is you're looking at the I T rates. They're coded by land use code, the type of development. And that's the industry standard for traffic.

[2:30:34] In other words, we're not really sure how many people will be in this complex except the traffic engineers seem to know. All right. That's my only question at the moment.

[2:30:43] So it gives you a rough range.

[2:30:46] Kurt thank you. I appreciate you acknowledging the goop family with the street names. I offer one name for consideration. Liza. Goop.

[2:30:58] Right. Megan.

[2:31:01] Um.

[2:31:03] Counselor, any particular spin would it be.

[2:31:06] Easy to figure out?

[2:31:07] Okay.

[2:31:08] I'm just offering the name.

[2:31:12] The path that I believe you. The walking path that will go through the complex. I think you acknowledge that our town attorney has not reviewed it yet.

[2:31:22] Correct.

[2:31:22] And you don't want anybody there after hours after dark.

[2:31:30] How do you expect to enforce if someone cuts? S4:

[2:31:30] We're not planning on policing it. I think what our plan was to was to put a sign up at Addison Road. We had already talked with the town engineer about continuing the signs that the town has. You have some signs right now that indicate where that bike path is. It's like a little green sign has a guy walking and a bike symbol or whatever. So I think we would put one of those at the Addison Road side of our path with an arrow showing people to go that way. And then I think underneath we would say like closed from dusk to dawn. But yeah, we're not going to be policing it, I don't think.

[2:32:06] Well, the bus shelter thing was just brought up. Um.

[2:32:13] I can't believe bus shelter is going to be provided for students. But if it is, I hope it's not one of those tacky bus shelters that used to be on Main Street. If you could look at the one at Main and Hebron between, I think that's a pretty decent shelter.

[2:32:30] Okay. Across from the library. Is that what you're saying? Yeah. Okay.

[2:32:35] Not the one at Main and Griswold.

[2:32:36] Mhm.

[2:32:40] I read the packet twice because I was on this open space land with possibility of, um, community gardens at a figure of $350,000 ballpark, I'm told, which means it could go up or it could go down.

[2:33:02] Um, we can guess which way it will go.

[2:33:06] Jonathan, is someone available to discuss? I know they talked about a well, as opposed to is MDC along Addison Road? Yes. Why not a connection to MDC? Why? Oh, well.

[2:33:23] Why all the pavement around this thing? S5:

[2:34:58] Well, if you I'm going to talk like John Monaco, if you remember him, Tom, that if you include town forces, there's an expense to that too. There's a financial expense and also where they could be doing something else. Absolutely. So I would I would want to see that included as well. Um, and you're talking about drilling a well, drilling for a.

[2:35:21] Well, drilling a well and maybe a solar powered.

[2:35:26] Okay. Um, I want to follow up on the preservation easement and kind of zero in on what your commitment is to preserving this property. I understand that the actual development will be your priority.

[2:35:45] So what are your thoughts on how you would preserve.

[2:35:53] Would you sell it, fix it up, sell it? S14:

[2:35:57] As is or with improvements.

[2:35:59] We would likely sell it as is. Yeah. So how I envision this going is we would um, if the pad is approved, we would obviously record the final milers we would record. Record all these documents. Obviously, like all the different easements. And then when we go to sell that lot, um, that preservation easement would be part of the deed that goes to whoever is buying it. So whoever is buying it is going to know that, um, this restriction is on it. It's going to be a specific buyer for sure. I don't think it's going to be for everyone. In my mind, what I envision this house looking like is if anyone's familiar with the house that's on the corner of Main Street and Red Hill, do you know that it's like a pretty white colonial? And they did that, like really nice addition in the back. That's what I feel like this house maybe could be, but it's going to take for sure somebody who, like has that vision and I don't know if it's going to be be everyone. So but they're going to take it subject to this easement, which is why I tried to spend a lot of time going through the mechanics so that somebody who gets this house understands that like, okay, I can't just go pull a building permit. Um, I'm going to need to like hire an architect and have a preservation consultant who's really going to look at these standards before I can really move forward with anything from an exterior perspective. So that was kind of my thought process in drafting it.

[2:37:21] When would you expect to put it on the market?

[2:37:24] I think we would try to put it on the market soon after we we get title to it. So and following approval, um, the closing wouldn't happen immediately. But obviously we can't put the preservation easement on it until the guts deed it to us. And then we would put the easement on and then try to market it and sell it to somebody else. Yeah.

[2:37:44] Um, my, my next question is more of a philosophical question with um, affordable units, Griswold Street, um, Hopewell Road, I, I like real estate as a way to build wealth, but everything that seems to be built, that has affordable component is lease or rental. Why is that? Do you.

[2:38:14] So I can jump in here. Um, and I think you hit the nail on the head counselor and talking about building wealth through real estate. One of the hesitations, if you will, is to build, uh, again, developers who are building for sale products, they obviously need to break, they need to be able to financially support the development of that. So you're looking at what you can command in the market, and then what that deed restricted price for affordability would be. And that often dictates what you can actually build. Density is a huge consideration, of course. So there's the the cost of the actual development, but also from a wealth building perspective, again, um, getting an affordable or a household with an affordable income, moderate or low affordability into a owner occupied for sale unit is is a great goal, but I my understanding is that there's some hesitation because the deed restrictions often run for 40 years and or in perpetuity. So they. If they then go to resell the new roof, they put on the change in the market, the additional improvements that they've done to the House. They're not necessarily equity builders, as you suggested, because they're still capped at that affordable resale rate. So that's part of the consideration. And when, when a developer or a builder is looking at, can this be for sale or for lease? Um, what's the market for it? What will it cost me to build? What rents or sale prices? Excuse me, can I command versus rents? So there's a lot that goes into it. But I agree, one of the, the hesitations is that there's also the concern about the initial outlay for um, for the deposit for a home, right. So presuming that you're putting down 5%. Even that can be difficult for for anyone, frankly, but especially when you're looking at affordable households. So there's a lot that goes into it.

[2:40:10] Do you have any statistics on who you anticipate to occupy town or local folks or people that would be coming from out of town? Any idea?

[2:40:20] So no specific metrics. And in fact, we we could not show any residency preference because that would run afoul of the Fair Housing Act. So I'm not no, no, no, I know, I'm just throwing it out there. Um, when you look at the affordable incomes and I'm going to pull our affordability plan right here. Uh, what the regulations require is that 80% of, I believe the lower of area median income or state statewide median income. So when you're looking at the affordable rents, again, I'm going back to our original application package, tab 12. Um, you're looking at folks who are making.

[2:40:59] So for a three bedroom unit goes by unit count, and then you're taking numbers that are issued yearly from HUD, which takes into account, um, you know, the incomes and also statewide rents and so on and so forth. And 80% households for a three bedroom unit, it makes over $107,000, almost $108,000. So extrapolate that into what we find often in communities like Glastonbury. You're talking teachers, firefighters, police officers, municipal employees, so on and so forth that very often want to live in town but cannot because finding housing is difficult. But I don't have any particular statistics. I'm talking just generally what I see in a lot of the affordable work that I do.

[2:41:45] Mhm. Um, and just an editorial comment for Jonathan and Steve Braun if he's listening. Um, I would hate to see any Um, property acquisitions or tree removal for Addison and Griswold Street. We should put that off for as long as possible. Um, even to the point that, you know, I drive through that quite, quite often to get down to North Main Street. And I very rarely run into any problems. The people obey the stop signs and they're courteous to let someone go. Um, so I would, I would vehemently oppose any destruction of that tree. Um, and the acquiring of private property for additional road turn lanes. Thank you.

[2:42:39] Any other questions from councilors? Jen.

[2:42:43] Hi. Thank you. Um, I also just want to say that, um, again with today's presentation, thank you for addressing very thoroughly, um, the concerns and questions that have been brought up in the past. And I think the the the. Packets are getting smaller. Maybe. Maybe not, I don't know.

[2:43:01] The.

[2:43:01] Presentation shorter. That's the hope. Um, yeah I know. Yeah. Noticing the time. Okay, so I have a few kind of like quick questions. And then I have a few like maybe more philosophical ones. So, um, I think we do need this type of housing, but I was looking at the floor plans from the last meeting and I believe, um, for, um, there's only ground floor bedrooms in the townhomes and only one per townhome, whether it's three, four or 5 or 6 units.

[2:43:37] Can you just confirm that and confirm how many total ground floor bedrooms there will be as part of the 157 units? S15:

[2:43:38] Do you have that? S14:

[2:43:54] Okay. Thank you. Um, okay. Question about condos was already addressed. Um, the I know we are, you know, not considering school age children. Um, in this application, um, this is more for informational purposes. I appreciate you pulling up the information just for my like data, like part of my brain, the, the Rutgers numbers were, it looked like in your packet were from 2007 to 2021. Um, and then the Skog or southeast, um, council of governance numbers, it like the, the memo said the study came out in 2020.

[2:44:39] So wouldn't that be less recent than the Rutgers numbers? Or are you saying that the, the, the southeast cog numbers were also updated from 2020? S15:

[2:44:43] Councilor. I believe that they were updated. I can confirm that. But again that's these two documents, if you will, are the most recent numbers and what we're looking at for for both. I know Rutgers has been updated previously, so those are the more recent numbers. And that's kind of what we've always looked at until we found out about the ECoG numbers, which are building upon the Rutgers numbers. Connecticut specific.

[2:45:05] Got it, got it. Okay. Thanks. Um, okay, so I'm going to get into Griswold. Addison. Um, so first of all, that intersection, I, like I mentioned, I live right by there and I drive through there multiple times a day. And I did not notice how faded the crosswalk was. So thank you for pointing that out, because I only realized that after reading the packet for this meeting, and I sent some pictures to Mister Louise and he had highway repaint them and they are now repainted. And the stop bars are also now repainted because those were also terribly faded. So I'm really happy about that. So thank you for bringing that to our attention, and thanks to our staff for taking care of it really quickly because it is high traffic and high pedestrian. So, um, so check that off your list. Um and then, um, so the monitoring of that, so the, so I think somewhere in Steve's memo or your, your information, it said that like, and I think this was a recommendation from TP and Z was to monitor that intersection for the possible future improvements. And I know that there's, there's like some like refusal of those improvements from my colleague, but, um, what would I guess maybe this is a question for Steve. Is Steve on? Um, no, he's not, but, um, I don't know if somebody can, can answer.

[2:46:27] Like what would that monitoring involve? S13:

[2:46:29] We can add a condition of approval that requests the developer to come back out and do new pedestrian counts, um, after a certain period after completion of the development. So it might be, uh, one year or two years after completion or full occupancy of the development. So we have truer pedestrian traffic numbers.

[2:46:52] I think that's that's that eastern. Yeah, that's at eastern. What I'm talking about is Addison and Griswold. And I think this is more monitoring for congestion. Um, because like, so I also reread the pad, um, our building zone regulations under pads and, and like, and traffic is something is a criteria for approval. So I think that the concern, like resident noted concerns are correct. I think you focusing on it in your presentation and really drying out the, the increase in delay and changes in level of services. It's like not it's worth focusing on. Um, and so my concern is that it does look like there's a deterioration. And there also was right at like Addison and Eastern, but you found a way to address it, which is great. And thank you. I think that is a public benefit. Um, but I think the Griswold Addison is, is still a concern to, to me. Um, I do think I know I brought up the independent study last time. I think that that that does risk like paralysis analysis, analysis, paralysis by analysis. Um, and I do think we have the, I feel like we have enough information before us, but I think that is a subjective, um, determination is that traffic going to. And I can't remember the exact language in our, in our regs, but it's something to, to we have to consider. And so I do wonder, um, especially given kind of the drastic changes that would need to be made, um, if that monitoring could be done by the applicant as well. Um, with some, I don't know, some resolution, I don't know what that is. I do not, I also understand it would be a really big deal to like take property and that tree does need to stay. Um, but I wonder like even something like pedestrian safety improvements, like I know it's farther from your, um, the property location, but it, it is, there is a documented like, like that increased traffic flow. Right. Um, just thinking longer term, I'm like, you know, maybe extending the, the sidewalk along the eastern side of Addison would at least help address the pedestrian safety aspects of that issue. It doesn't obviously address the congestion, but it might actually address the congestion if fewer people are having to stop for pedestrians. Because again, it's like busy pedestrian. So not having a crosshair is really awkward crossing around the tree because you have to like kind of look around the tree to make sure that you're making eye contact with the car coming up. Addison. So those are just some ideas. Um, because I, I do hear like my neighbors who are concerned about the congestion and about the pedestrian safety and just like trying to find a way to deal with that longer term is, is something that I would, I would look to see if you all have any ideas around those like longer term resolutions.

[2:49:37] So a couple things I want to point out what I, what this sort of scenario reminded me of was the way the intersection used to be at Hebron Avenue and House Street before we had the roundabout. Do you remember how that intersection was? So that was just, um, uh, an intersection where Hebron Avenue had no stop sign. House Street had a stop sign. Um, and there was always a lot of traffic. And when you were going left, you would just kind of like floor it. And there was tons of accidents there. Um, and Steve and, or Dan Pennington put in the don't block the box. Um, and I remember talking to them when we were doing one Glastonbury place. And I know what engineering department really focuses on before they put in a don't block the box is like the accidents. It's not so much the congestion, but are people trying to like make that crazy left hand maneuver where then we're getting accidents with with injuries. So I think one of the things that the engineering department monitors when Steve is saying, oh, we're going to keep monitoring is like, is there an increase in accidents or injuries with pedestrians? And I do think that Steve is like monitoring all that stuff. Um, as part of like the engineering department regarding if, uh, I think this sort of comes down to, um, what a lot of stuff comes down to with the town council is where you're balancing, right? Um, so you're, you're setting that public policy. We're balancing that 12 second delay in the PM peak versus that tree. And that's hard to like quantify really what, what the value of the tree is. But you guys, right are elected. So I have to make those tough decisions on what the value of the tree is. The only other way where you could keep that tree is then you'd even have to take even more property on the west side of the street, right? Like skew it all over just to save the tree. Um, and that also, I don't know if that, you know, is worth that additional delay. So that's the only other thing. And from a developer standpoint, we obviously can't condemn somebody's property and take it like the the town would would have to do it, which is why I think Steve was like, we would keep monitoring it. So.

[2:51:47] Okay.

[2:51:48] Um, so actually on that sort of later question, um, so you provided a lot of info about the AM and PM peak. Um, I was wondering and apologies if this was in like any. Yeah, like if you can give the hour. So I would like to see not just the peak hours, but like all the hours, um, just, just to look at what the shoulders look like. Um, I imagine that these are peak peaks, but like, I'm just kind of curious what they look like in the hours around the peaks. And if you could provide that or point me to where to find that in an easy to read format.

[2:52:21] So I don't know, councilor, that we have the counts for every single hour of the day. We we don't typically again. And Andrew. Yeah, that's just not something we're always looking at. Worst case scenario, we're not going to look at 2:00 in the morning. I mean, you'd literally have someone counting or a machine counting traffic out at 2 a.m. when there's likely no traffic. So you're always a level of service, a yes, likely at every intersection in town. Um, you're really just looking at AM and PM peak, which again here I think the a m was 730 to 830, which directly encompasses the start of Smith and Norbeck. And then I think the PM peak was 430 to 530, but we went even further than that and looked at the school dismissal time of Smith Middle School, which don't quote me on it, somewhere in the range of 2:30 p.m. and we found that the traditional, so to speak, PM peak of 430 to 530. That was actually, um, a busier time than school dismissal. So we're always evaluating a AM peak PM peak, what those hours are changes a little bit depending on the site, but we're not looking at.

[2:53:29] Okay.

[2:53:30] The 24 hours.

[2:53:31] So not even in the model, like not even in the IT model.

[2:53:35] So I'm looking at our December 2025. This is Tab five. I'm looking at all the turning movement counts and everything. It's AM and PM peak. Okay. For those reasons.

[2:53:44] Okay. Yeah. I think it was just because you mentioned offhand that, you know, the 230 dismissal time seemed to be less than the 430. So the 45. So I was kind of wondering what that was. Um, and so maybe that was just like an eyeball, um, kind of.

[2:54:00] I guess they wouldn't have just eyeballed it. Counselor. So I'm going to try and pull that up. I think it was, uh, 215 to 315 and that's also shown on figure two. This is our original traffic study from December 2025. So those counts and those numbers are there. But again, I think the focus was always on the 430 to 5:30 p.m..

[2:54:20] Um, great. I think I have one more traffic related question. So I think in the supplement for today's meeting numbers, page 21, number seven. Um, and I think it's on here too in the public benefit. Slide 33, item G. It says modifying the corner radius at Addison Road slash Eastern Boulevard slash slash Smith Middle School. What can you talk about? What? That modifying the corner radius.

[2:54:51] Are you trying to make it a tighter, like a like a sharper turn? Or are you trying to make it a, like a looser turn? And what is it trying to accomplish? S13:

[2:54:59] I know Steve Brown asked us to do that. That's why we did it. Yeah, yeah.

[2:55:02] Got it, got it. Okay, cool. Um, I just yeah, I'm sure you all are on it, but like, sometimes, like when you make the radius, like easier for turning, it makes it faster, which makes it worse for pedestrians.

[2:55:17] Yeah. That certainly wasn't the, the goal here because we're talking about the restriping that we're doing, sorry, the restriping that we're doing. So part of that improvement in that area is the Restriping and the Re configuration or the tightening of that radius to, again, enable school busses when they're exiting or entering or exiting Smith Middle School to be able to do that properly without, I believe, infringing on the oncoming lanes of traffic.

[2:55:41] Um, all right. So I think the, the donation, um, and I, I think, you know, to the neighbors who are wondering why, like, I'll just speak for myself, right? Like why I was not into the idea of accepting it is because, um, we do own a lot of public property. Um, every, every public property we take on is, is like a decision, um, not just about the cost, about what the property is and does what its future potential is. Um, but, but truly its impact on our budget taxpayers. Um, what kind of grant funding there could be, and also what kind of labor costs are involved in terms of town staff and like to the point made earlier, it's not just, yeah, those the costs of like their time, but really their opportunity cost. And in our our our town manager, I think to his credit and all of the town staff work really hard for us. We keep a lean budget. If you look at our budget increases every year, they're really lean. I don't want to compare it to the other governing body, but just in terms of the town side of the budget, um, our increases are really reasonable. And because in most of our budget is staff, right. And so we, we already know that certain departments have asked for more staff because of workload. Um, and so I'm not saying that this is anything that's going to put it over the edge, like our staff, like, you know, absorb stuff like they do, like what we see as priorities. So I'm not saying that that's a problem, but it's just another consideration. Um, and it's all about priorities. So, you know, the example of the dredging of the river, like, I don't want to rehash that, but, but you know, that vote went the way it was and those reasons were stated on the record. It's protecting an existing asset boat owners for. For what it's worth. I know some boat owners who use that boat ramp and they're not like, these are not like really rich people. Um, the ones I know, this is like an affordable means of recreation on the river. You can take your kids out. It's like go to the sandbar up by Hartford. Like, um, pack a picnic, you know, so I don't want it to, you know, it's not like, oh, for like those, like, you know, like bougie boat owners. Um, so like, so that was a decision again, I don't want to relitigate that. Um, in terms of the farmland that we have purchased, like, so anything that we, in terms of farmland, it's purchased with our land preservation and farm preservation dollars, those are voted on by referendum and those are for preservation of the land. Any kind of like improvements and like the renovations and some of the big ticket items like roofs and that kind of stuff like that. Um, it just seems like too much to take on. And that comes on the town budget. That's, that's not really part of like the the referendum voted money and it would be a responsible that way. So I think it's all about stewardship. I think that there are some good ideas. And the problem is that in. It's true that for me, historical society was like, if they could do it, that was that was going to be great. But it didn't sound so, you know, they like right have officially said they didn't want to do it for capacity and funding issues. And so that leaves us at square one again. And I do appreciate Mr. Burroughs, um, you know, really generously, I think offering to, to, to perhaps partner on this and, and put in this escrow. Um, I did think about an idea, which was like, what if we, and again, this is my idea and I'm not even sure if I'm for it, but would it be possible to like, accept the donation contingent on. I was thinking a one year window, but maybe it's a 24 month window contingent on an appropriate partnership coming together for some use of the land that is acceptable to the town, and preserves the view shed and preserves the buildings. And if that doesn't come through in a way that the Town council at that time agrees upon, then the donation is not accepted. That's the only thing I can think of that would protect us from having basically a future liability. Right. This is not an existing asset. This is something that we're going to have to maintain. I frankly don't think we should be in the business of being a landlord to single family homes, whether affordable or not. It's just the economies of scale are two to nonexistent. Um, so, so that's the only idea I have. Um, the barn use is interesting. And I did think about that as Mr. Smith had suggested that. And I know that one of the problems is that right now the path goes between the barn and the fields. Um, the path could be moved, you know, maybe the, the path could go like south of the house and the barn. So that would keep those like building the two buildings in the field more contiguous. Um, so I'm just, I'm really trying to think creatively here, but I without any, like any vestige of, of interest for, for a use that's beyond single family. Um, I understand, you know, we could take the donation and then we can just turn around and sell it as is, right immediately. And we would get that, you know, whatever the net on that is. Um, I just, I don't as a priority in terms of the money and then the sort of like, sure. It's like not nothing, but like the gains and the effort. I just don't see a clear path for us that would make sense. So that's my explanation and I hope that makes sense. But I'm still open to the conversation, so I think I'll leave it at I had a lot more comments about the community garden, but maybe I'll get to that later.

[3:01:14] Any other questions from councilors?

[3:01:17] Well, What if we were.

[3:01:22] If we were to accept the land, would we have the right to immediately sell it, or would we have to go through a referendum?

[3:01:27] I believe it's referendum unless the value is under $20,000. Thank you.

[3:01:34] Any other questions?

[3:01:37] No.

[3:01:40] The agenda tonight calls for sending the issue of potential sale of the strip along Eastern Boulevard to the subcommittee.

[3:01:54] How would it work when we don't know what we're going to ask for the property on an approval for this project.

[3:02:01] A point of order. We're in a public hearing. You're talking about another agenda item. I think we need to finish the public hearing.

[3:02:08] No, this question definitely relates to this item because I'm wondering this is a public hearing on a pad and the pad requires access over town land, which is to be sold. And I want to know how that would work. How do we approve a pad if we don't know what we're doing with the land as far as price is concerned? Tom for explanation. So the question, I guess, is the town manager, how do what is our pad process if we don't know if the access is across town land, which we haven't decided what we're selling it for yet.

[3:02:45] Well, I think tonight and Shelly could jump in on this. I think tonight the recommendation from staff is not to vote on the pad. The recommendation is to tackle the items that are later on in the continue the public hearing, tackle the items that are listed later on in the agenda. And that would be the referrals. And that gives us time to come up with the values and gives us more time to talk about other issues as well.

[3:03:11] And do we have any time constraints on the review process for the.

[3:03:15] Shelley time constraints.

[3:03:17] No you don't. As a request.

[3:03:19] For rezoning your. You can keep the public hearing open. And so our hope is to have the appraised value ready in time so that you have those numbers and have a recommendation from the committee. Um and TPC on the sale of it. Um before the, your meeting on the 13th, if you don't, I would again recommend that you continue. I do think that it's important for the council to understand, um, what that sale entails. Um, before making a decision about the approval of the pad and the rezoning.

[3:03:55] So are there, are there any time constraints that we have to make a decision by?

[3:04:00] No. Unlike a special permit or other land use applications, um, we do not have to close the public hearing within any particular time frame.

[3:04:09] Thank you.

[3:04:09] Yeah.

[3:04:11] Yeah.

[3:04:12] I'm going, if I may. Through you, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to quadruple check this, but I believe that the statute says where there is a public hearing required or held, you're subject to the time constraints of any other public hearing. So from receipt 65 days to open up the public hearing from the conception of the public hearing the opening, you have 35 days to close the public hearing and 65 days to deliberate. The applicant can consent to one or more extensions of time that do not exceed 65 additional days. Again, off the top of my head, and maybe it's the hour. I don't know of any exception to that when it's a just a zone change application, but that's the general timeline.

[3:04:52] I will defer to the.

[3:04:54] Attorney on this. It is late and I may have gotten it wrong. Um, so I'll, I'll consult with our town attorney as well and, and look up the statute. Um, but we, we could request an extension in this case.

[3:05:07] Yeah. And to be clear, we have not provided any extensions of time up through today because we just opened up the public hearing on September 8th. So what I would I'm not going to do the math right now, but September 8th, add 35 days. That's when the public hearing should close close by. Then you can extend it by up to an additional 65 days. Hopefully not, not something that would require.

[3:05:28] Approval of the applicant.

[3:05:30] I'm sorry.

[3:05:31] No, we have to.

[3:05:32] We have to consent. But if there are additional things to iron out, I'm not in the business of not consenting to that. When we need additional time to to work through some significant things on the application.

[3:05:44] Thank you.

[3:05:46] Just to clarify, Jonathan, kind of to piggyback on on Whit's question in regards to this, um, the referrals to town Services and Land Appraisals committee and town planning and zoning, um, both for the sale and or the donation, that doesn't stop us from Changing course at the next meeting if we wanted to.

[3:06:13] Correct? S5:

[3:06:20] Okay. Thank you.

[3:06:26] Any other questions? S1:

[3:06:36] Please feel free to come on up.

[3:06:44] Please state your name and address for the record.

[3:06:47] Tracy Worthington, 499 Bell Street. Um, about the intersection at Addison and Griswold. Excuse me. I am on the road a lot now in town, and I'm in that area a lot. Cambridge. Haywood. Trinity. I'm up there a lot and right now the three way stop works. Um, if you take that tree down and extend another la Reine for right turn.

[3:07:25] People don't stop at stop signs anymore. They just don't. They're elective. And right now, everybody stops at that three way. Um, and in light of the accident on Main Street on 17, where somebody had a car go in their yard. The yards in that area are so small compared to the ones on 17 in South Main Street, people would have cars in their, in their living rooms. Um, and I would hate to see, I would hate to see it be more than a three way or get rid of that tree. I mean, it just it works the way it is. AM I waiting a little bit longer? At times I am, and I could be up there at 11:00 in the morning, or 130 or 2:00 in the afternoon, and there may be 1 or 2 cars in front of me when I'm transporting somebody, but it works. And I really I feel very strongly about opening that up, taking front yards and making an additional right hand turn lane, because I just think it'd be be asking for trouble anyway, just from somebody who's on the road a lot now. Thank you.

[3:08:48] Thank you. Tracy. Uh, is there anyone else that would like to come up and speak in regards to new information that was presented?

[3:08:57] Rob Smith, 100 Edison Road just for what um, Councilor Wong said about, you know, the possibility of taking the donation with the contingency that we find an appropriate use within 24 months. That's, you know, kind of what exactly what I was proposing. She said it a little better than me. We have the $50,000 pledge, um, for carrying costs to get us there. Um, and then there's, there's this perception that the only preservation group that any anyone was interested in working with or tried to work with was the historical society. So I think we owe it to the property to see what else is out there. I don't think we only look for one bid if we're looking to do a project. So that's all I have to say.

[3:09:43] Anyone else?

[3:09:46] Seeing none.

[3:09:48] Anyone on Zoom? S3:

[3:10:00] Thank you. Um, at this time, do you want to read the motion?

[3:10:08] Be it resolved.

[3:10:12] Be it resolved that the Town Council hereby continues the public hearing concerning the application of Jay Rack Development, LLC for change of zone from planned employment zone to residence, a one. 55 Addison Road, 25 Mill Street, 45 Mill Street, and a lot and lot W four Mill Street to the Town Council meeting of Tuesday, October 13th, 2026 at 8 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Town Hall, 2155 Main Street, Glassboro, and or through Zoom video conferencing.

[3:10:45] Thank you. Do I have a second? Second. I have a second with Kurt. Uh. Thank you. Um, just for the public's knowledge once again. You know, you had heard tonight that we are still waiting on some information. Um, and for our town attorney to review a few items. So we are continuing this once again to the October 13th meeting at 8 p.m.. Uh, you're more than welcome to come and have more questions answered if based off of the information that's presented at that time.

[3:11:19] Um, any discussion? S9:

[3:12:00] I can do that.

[3:12:01] Thank you.

[3:12:02] Any other discussion?

[3:12:03] Can I say sorry? Can I say one thing? Um, again, for the record, Megan, I know there was a discussion about possibly, like, if the town is looking to see if they can do something for 24 months and if not, like not accepting the donation, I, I'm not sure how that would work legally because we'd have to deed it to you. And then you can't just like give a deed back to somebody else. So we could like, I just want to throw that out there legally. I'm not sure how we would, how we would be able to pay for that.

[3:12:32] Can I, can I amend my request to also include, um, a request, uh, to the powers that be to look into how that might work legally? Um.

[3:12:45] I could discuss that with the town attorney.

[3:12:47] Thank you. Yeah. I guess in terms of the carrying cost, maybe just like annual annual costs, like not necessarily for the 24 months. But just out of curiosity, like what it would look like annually. Thanks.

[3:13:01] Any other discussion, Tom?

[3:13:06] Jonathan, would you talk to the current landowner as that house is not being used? Uh, whether they heed it, uh, whether or not the electricity in the building is live, uh, or whether it's just in cold storage. Uh, so I'd be interested in what the guts are currently spending will do.

[3:13:28] Any other discussion? Seeing none. All in favor, say aye. Opposed? None. 9 to 0. Uh, we are on to public hearing number two, uh, which is a change of zone to pad zone and adopt final development plan. We're going to be continuing this as well. Um, but I will open it up to the public real fast. Um, if anyone would like to speak before us in regards to that, please feel free to come on up.

[3:14:03] Nope. Nobody on.

[3:14:04] If anyone on Zoom would like to comment on this public hearing, please raise your hand in the Zoom app. No one.

[3:14:11] Sounds good. Uh, any councilors questions? Seeing none.

[3:14:20] Um, Mary, can you read the motion? S19:

[3:14:53] Do I have a second? I have a second with Kurt. Any discussion? Seeing none. All in favor, say aye. Opposed? None. 9 to 0. Thank you very much, everybody. Moving on to old business for a discussion. Possible action regarding the format for the automated license plate readers public meeting.

[3:15:16] Mr. chairman, given the hour, I'm wondering if we might get consent to just postpone this to another meeting. Um, with our parliamentarians. I think I can do that because there's no formal action.

[3:15:29] Second.

[3:15:33] Well, I have a first and a second on a not so motion, but yeah. Um.

[3:15:40] We can keep it on.

[3:15:41] What's everyone feel in regards to.

[3:15:49] Why don't you do a show of hands?

[3:15:50] Quick show of hands.

[3:15:54] Who wants to postpone it? S11:

[3:15:59] It's just a matter of picking a meeting, right?

[3:16:01] Okay, we'll keep it. If you don't concern, we will keep it.

[3:16:04] Jonathan. Oh, sorry.

[3:16:09] Um, just tell him to get ready for it.

[3:16:14] So there are options.

[3:16:16] Sorry. So there are options for the council in terms of where to hold the meeting. I think that's first and foremost because the availability of the RCC is so limited, especially if we're going to go with opening it up to both sides right now. Um, you know, this is 88 people for seating capacity in these, uh, in these chairs here. Um, but if you want to go RCC, we have a date open for Wednesday, September 30th. And then we're looking at, um, other dates in October, but those dates would require canceling. Other programs that already have reserved those rooms. So, uh, you know, I think it starts with just a determination by the council of the location if this room would suffice. And then the next question would be, if you do are okay with this room.

[3:17:10] I think the next question is do you want to have it on a special meeting, or do you want to have it on a regular meeting? S11:

[3:17:10] I think we can have a regular meeting, as long as there's not a zoning application in front of us in council chambers with the participation of council members, I guess that would be the first item.

[3:17:25] Other thoughts?

[3:17:29] I was under the impression that this was not going to be a council meeting whatsoever, but it was just going to be a workshop that the police department provided to provide information on this.

[3:17:37] That is an option. That's one of the options.

[3:17:39] Certainly one that I'd prefer.

[3:17:43] Mary.

[3:17:45] I think the reason that we want to have it as a meeting as opposed to that is unless we all pinky promise that we will not comment at all during the meeting. It has to be a council meeting.

[3:18:00] A quorum.

[3:18:02] If a quorum participate in the meeting, it triggers a council meeting.

[3:18:10] So yeah, I guess the question becomes do councilors want to participate in this, or is this just an informational meeting being put on by the chief?

[3:18:19] What my impression was that the council has already been informed of this. This is actually for the public's benefit. So I don't know why we need to participate further in it personally.

[3:18:33] Uh, Anthony. Uh, Jen. Um, I mean, I, I personally think just given the, the public interest in it, um, And the potential for there to be a need for council members to engage in the conversation. I do think it needs to be a meeting, and I personally would prefer for it to be a special meeting again, just given the amount of interest that's within the public, I think it deserves a dedicated time to have this conversation without it being particularly rushed by other agenda items or, you know, distracted by other agenda items. So I would personally be in favor of it being a special council meeting.

[3:19:11] Jen.

[3:19:12] Um, I agree with Councilor Delizia. Um, I think that originally I thought it could be just for the public. Um, and we would, you know, we could be in the audience, but we would like zip it. Um, but not only do I not trust all of us, including myself to do that, but, um, moreover, the, the issue is that it is a policy, it's very much a policy decision because we absolutely have the control to pull the plug on it or not. Um, And so I think I think that is incumbent on us to be part of the conversation, even if it's more in a like asking some additional questions, asking follow up questions, making sure certain questions from the audience are addressed. You know, in follow up by staff, like I think we should be involved in that way. And then I think in terms of special versus regular meeting, I think it should be a special meeting because, um, like that whole contingent, like if there's not a zoning application or like, you know, some other time consuming agenda item, we can't really predict that that far out. And I think it needs to be not so far out that it like, you know, dilutes the interest, but it needs to be far enough out so that there's like enough notice given. And so I think that just having a special day, even if that means more obligation for us, is probably and like staff, like, I think that's, um, probably the best way to go.

[3:20:32] Larry.

[3:20:33] Um, I pinky swear.

[3:20:37] But personally, I agree with Councilor Osgood. I want to hear from the public. I'm. I know what you all think. We've heard it. I'm interested in input from the public. Um, I want to listen. And then when we are going to decide, we can hash all that out again. Um, but that's kind of the page I'm on. I think we can accomplish what Councilor Wong wants to do and still be active listeners.

[3:21:07] Yeah, I, I don't care if it's a special council meeting or regular council meeting. It should be a council meeting. I know Mary was cut off a couple weeks ago. It was 11, 1130 at night. I had additional questions. I want to be able to hear from the public, uh, respond to the public and and ask more questions. So I, it needs to be a council meeting where we participate.

[3:21:33] Any other.

[3:21:34] Statement.

[3:21:35] So be it. Let's pick a date.

[3:21:37] Okay. Figure it out.

[3:21:39] Uh, is the council okay with having the meeting in this room or the RCC? This room? This room is fine. It makes things a lot easier. And so, um, you could pick tonight if everyone has their calendar availability. Or we could figure it out between now and the next meeting and announce it at the next meeting. Whatever you prefer.

[3:21:56] Yeah, my preference would be. Yeah. Why don't you figure out a date? But I I'm in agreement. If you're going to do it as a special meeting, then it should be far enough out where you can give proper public notice and, and give us time to figure out our schedules too.

[3:22:11] So, so we'll do it. So we'll, I'll announce it in my, uh, we'll coordinate it between now and the next meeting, and I'll announce it in the town manager's report in the next meeting, if that's okay with everyone.

[3:22:21] Thank you. Jonathan.

[3:22:23] Item five A action on between Department Transfer Police to Information Technology $40,263. Town wide fire panel replacements. Jonathan.

[3:22:34] This is a panel. This is for last fiscal year, by the way, not this fiscal year. And it is for upgrading our fire panels. A number of these panels need to be upgraded because we have the wiring that goes to them is is the traditional pots line wiring. And we're going to fiber because they're not being maintained anymore. And so these require these upgrades are needed in order to, in order to make that transition to the fiber. And the Board of Finance has already approved this.

[3:23:06] Mary, can you read the motion?

[3:23:08] Be it resolved that the Town Council hereby approves the transfer of $40,263 from police capital outlay office equipment to information tech, capital outlay, office equipment for the replacement and improvement of town wide fire panels, as described in a report by the Director of Finance and Administrative Services dated September 18th, 2026 and as recommended by the Board of Finance.

[3:23:33] Second, I have a second with Curt. Any discussion? Larry.

[3:23:37] Uh, Jonathan, I'm in favor of this. I'm happy to. I'm not going to second guess our IT department. Um, but we've had to recently do this, um, where I work and there are some more economical ways. So if we approve the money, I'd still be happy to talk to you about that. Um, there might be better ways to accomplish it.

[3:23:56] I'll be all ears.

[3:23:58] Okay.

[3:23:59] Any other discussion? Yes. Curt.

[3:24:02] Jonathan, did you say that this was from last fiscal year?

[3:24:06] Yes. These are transfers we're doing because we haven't closed the books on last fiscal year. So we're using available money there to move over into capital outlay. And then the capital outlay gets moved into this fiscal year.

[3:24:17] When do you expect to close out.

[3:24:21] Tonight will be our last transfers. So uh so I think we're going to start closing the books in October.

[3:24:33] Any other discussion? Seeing none. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed. Passes 9 to 0. Uh. Item five B action on between Department transfer, senior services, youth services and leisure services to senior services. $90,000 replacement of MV1 Van Jonathan.

[3:24:57] This is also transfer last fiscal year that will be utilized to make a purchase this fiscal year. And so we have a 2014MV1 handicapped accessible vehicle that is in very rough shape. We have been replacing parts with this vehicle with another vehicle that somebody donated to us. We're out of used parts. This vehicle has been in and out of service for the past fiscal year or so. And what we want to do is replace it with a commercial Toyota Sienna hybrid or commercial Chrysler Pacifica, and both of those would provide an Ada compliant replacement vehicle. So it's $90,000. That is the higher of those two. We still have to flesh out which of those models is going to be best for us. But this has been also approved by the Board of Finance.

[3:25:51] Uh, Mary, can you please read the motion?

[3:25:54] Sure. Be it resolved that the Glastonbury Town Council hereby approves the transfer of $55,685 from senior services, $18,465 from youth services, and $15,850 from leisure services, for a total of $90,000 to senior services. Capital outlay vehicles, as described in a report from the Director of Finance and Administrative Services dated September 18th, 2026 and as recommended by the Board of Finance.

[3:26:25] Second.

[3:26:26] And the second with Curt. I have a second with Curt.

[3:26:31] Any discussion? S20:

[3:26:31] Question. Yes.

[3:26:33] What? S20:

[3:26:45] But is that specific use come into last year's budget or does it come into this year's budget? S5:

[3:26:51] Thank you.

[3:26:53] Kurt, what do you expect to have happen with the vehicle you're replacing?

[3:27:00] I think we'd probably just junk it. The fire.

[3:27:02] Department.

[3:27:04] Yeah. Good idea. With the fire department train on it.

[3:27:07] How often do you get a vehicle?

[3:27:11] Any other discussion? Seeing none. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Passes 9 to 0. Uh. Item five C action on between Department transfer. Police. Fiscal services. Insurance to pension $400,000. Additional contribution to town pension plan.

[3:27:30] Jonathan, this, um, would not be a capital outlay transfer because it's not capital. But this is spending last year's money at this time. Um, so it's going to be a last year transaction. And the idea here is when the town finalized its agreement and it has been finalized with the police police officers association for successor collective bargaining agreement. The town did incur instantaneously retroactive to July 1st outstanding pension liability. So the thought here, given our position where we are financially with last fiscal year, which I mentioned in my town manager's report tonight, the thought is to address some of that liability and actually address all of the outstanding liability by doing a $400,000 contribution to the pension fund. So that would cover about 330,000 $339,000 of instantaneous unfunded liability that was created, plus an additional 4000 ish for the going forward cost. So because that kicks in July 1st of 26, which has already happened, and we were in our budget, so we didn't account for that. So this allows us to get ahead of next of this upcoming budget season. When we talk about the A deck for the next fiscal year, the actuarial determined employer contribution. And so it will minimize increases in future years. And this has been explained also to the Board of Finance. And they did approve this unanimously.

[3:29:02] Thank you. Mary, can you read the motion.

[3:29:06] Of the glass? Mary Town Council approves a fiscal year 2026 transfer request totaling $400,000 from departments, police, fiscal services and insurance to the police pension account for an additional contribution to the town's pension plan to cover the unfunded liabilities associated with the fiscal year 2026 through fiscal year 2029. GOPGPO. A contract, as described in a report by the Director of Finance and Administrative Services dated September 18th, 2026 and is recommended by the Board of Finance.

[3:29:41] Second.

[3:29:42] I've got a second.

[3:29:47] Any discussion? S11:

[3:29:55] Uh, the next item is discussion. Possible action on proposed sale of 0.26 plus or minus acres of town owned land on Eastern Boulevard.

[3:30:11] Assessor's map block number F52100E004A S11:

[3:30:21] None of this obligates the town to sell it. It simply gets the ball rolling so that if the council wants to sell it, it is in a position to have checked off all the necessary boxes, so to speak, to be able to sell it. I will also mention that we listed the property for sale on our website at the recommendation of the town attorney, because that was one of the conditions that was included in the 2000 referendum approval to the town to sell the parcels in the corporate park. So there is that obligation. But, you know, we'll let you know if anything else comes in terms of offers on this property.

[3:30:56] Um, arbitrage opportunity.

[3:30:58] So um, it is, it is listed and we are getting the other obligation as part of that referendum vote was an appraisal. So we're getting an appraisal and that will be provided to the subcommittee as soon as it's become available. And the council will also be made aware of what that appraisal value is.

[3:31:16] Thank you. Mary.

[3:31:18] Can you read the motion? S19:

[3:31:37] With assessor's map block number of F5/2 thousand 100 slash E0004A S19:

[3:32:04] Second.

[3:32:05] Got a second with Curt. Any discussion with.

[3:32:08] Jonathan?

[3:32:08] Could you just tell me who's on town services and appraisal?

[3:32:11] Can you put your mic on and.

[3:32:13] Town services and appraisal. John.

[3:32:15] I don't recall off the top of my head, but I'll get back. Back to you.

[3:32:22] Kurt.

[3:32:24] Are you saying this little spike strip is on the market?

[3:32:27] It is.

[3:32:29] And how long has it been on the market?

[3:32:31] Since Monday.

[3:32:32] And how is it costing us anything?

[3:32:35] No, it's on the website. Okay, so.

[3:32:39] Larry.

[3:32:41] I did hear my name thrown around for that. I don't have any recollection of that. I'd just like to say that publicly. Um, but also, Jonathan, I just want to confirm that this doesn't even obligate us to sell this. We preserve our right to grant an easement going forward, if that's what the council so chose.

[3:33:02] Yes. Yes, I believe so. And to that point, you may want. I'm not sure. But because time is of the essence, you may want to amend the motion to maybe refer to the Planning and Zoning Commission, a sale or conveyance of an easement a non revocable easement friendly amendment.

[3:33:27] Manager, I believe I'm sorry to interrupt, but I believe that our town attorney, Ken Slater, weighed.

[3:33:34] In at our last meeting, September 8th, that the easements do not require the eight two for referral. It's only the land donation and the sale that trigger the eight two for referral. Therefore, we didn't prepare an eight two for referral for the public access easement, for example.

[3:33:54] I just don't want to bind us to a sale this evening. That's that's all I'm trying to avoid here. I'm not that we won't sell it, but I just wanted I don't want to bind us to that at this point.

[3:34:08] Tom.

[3:34:10] Larry, I think your point is well taken, but this is just a referral. They can send back whatever advice they want. We haven't made a decision. Once that information comes back, um, we can decide whether it's an easement or a sale. Um, so that this moves forward. I think the last thing you want to have happen is somebody come in and offer $50,000 for it, which then puts you in a situation where you'd have to pay more than that or deal with a new owner. So that's why we want to keep, I think, our options open.

[3:34:50] Pretty sure that might be an ethics violation for any of us to buy it right now.

[3:34:57] Uh, Jen.

[3:34:59] Uh, just like a logistical question then. So, um, so we're referring it to this committee, um, and right public hearing, October 13th. That's. our next meeting, right? Three weeks. Um, and so if the committee comes back and recommends a sale and the, the council, if, you know, council majority decides that the sale is the way to go and that will require the 824 referral.

[3:35:30] Do we have enough time to do that? S5:

[3:35:38] Yes. That's correct. Um, the appraisal, the timing of the appraisal was the only unknown factor, but we're pushing to get it done as soon as possible. Um, the, uh, Town Planning and Zoning Commission doesn't need the appraised value in order to make a decision. Um, their, their concern is really just compliance with the plan of conservation and development.

[3:36:02] So like they could, so we could then refer it to T, P and Z on the 13th, and then they would meet on the 20th and then.

[3:36:12] Oh no, sorry. They will be meeting.

[3:36:13] On October 6th. If you refer it tonight. So you will have their recommendation on October 13th.

[3:36:22] Got it, got it. I see. Sorry. I understand now. Thank you. Just making sure.

[3:36:28] Yeah. The tough part here is going to be getting the appraisal. So that subcommittee may be meeting like, you know, the day before the council meeting on the 13th. Okay. Coming 30 minutes before the council meeting type of thing.

[3:36:43] Jonathan, there's nothing that says that the subcommittee has to take the recommendation of an appraisal, is there?

[3:36:49] I don't I don't remember seeing anything that says that.

[3:36:52] Yeah. Because, you know, if you look at it as being a 10th of an acre, the value is de minimis. But if you look at the value it has to the associated property, the value is significant. Now I'll just point that out to the subcommittee. Who members? I don't know as of yet, but we'll.

[3:37:10] Just to to confirm, if we were to sell this for more than $20,000, it would have to go to referendum. No, no.

[3:37:18] It's exempt based on the 2000 referendum that gave future councils the ability to sell even above the 20,000 mark, pending the referral of the sub pending the um, marketing it and getting an appraisal.

[3:37:37] Understood.

[3:37:38] I just want to follow up on that. Was it all of eastern Western National, or was it just a portion that we acquired through a tax foreclosure?

[3:37:47] As I remember, there was a map of the parcels and there wasn't it wasn't all uniform. I don't remember the exact history as to how we acquired all of them, but I know there was a like a scattering of parcels. This one in particular, the small one like sticks out. You can barely see it on the map.

[3:38:05] Yeah. It's there. I'm just wondering if that came under the tax foreclosure. Yeah, it was too far down.

[3:38:14] So I am sure certain it's on the map that was distributed for the like the, um the explanatory text in advance of the council meeting.

[3:38:28] Any other discussion?

[3:38:31] Anthony.

[3:38:33] Just in consideration for this referral. Um, I would hate to see us try to continue, uh, squeezing the developer for more and more and more and more. So if there's an avenue for a free easement, I would personally love to see that considered very strongly.

[3:38:53] Mr. chairman.

[3:38:57] Anthony, I don't presume you want to spend town money to support a development that we don't benefit from in particular. So in other words, if we have costs associated with taking the land for the field, or if we have costs associated with any restrictions or easements on the house, you don't want the town to pay for that out of town budget, do you?

[3:39:23] Any other discussion?

[3:39:26] AM I allowed to respond through the chair? Through the.

[3:39:29] Chair.

[3:39:30] Yes. I would love to see the recommendation from the from the subcommittee that's going to going to review this.

[3:39:36] Fair enough. Any other discussion? Seeing none. All in favor, say aye. Aye.

[3:39:45] Opposed? S11:

[3:40:07] As proposed by Durack Development, LLC as part of its planned Area Development application for 155 Addison Road. 25 Mill Street, 45 Mill Street and Lot W, four Mill Street. Approve acceptance. Refer to Town Plan and Zoning Commission. Jonathan.

[3:40:26] So the statutes require that the Council refer any, uh, an acquisition, whether it's, you know, something we're going to pay for or accept for free of charge, um, to the Planning and Zoning commission. So that's what this motion does.

[3:40:44] Um, similar to my, the previous item, my question is if we, this is just a referral to town Planning and zoning Commission, correct. We can still reverse course and decide not to accept it.

[3:40:58] Yes.

[3:40:58] Correct. Okay. Um, Mary, can you read the motion?

[3:41:02] Be it resolved that the Town Council hereby refers to the Town Plan and Zoning Commission, the proposed acquisition of the 1.

[3:41:21] 62 plus or minus acre portion of the 155 Edison property assessor's map block number F5002W001 S19:

[3:41:33] I have a second with Curt.

[3:41:37] Any discussion? S11:

[3:41:45] Uh. Consent calendar.

[3:41:49] Jonathan, we have a general fund transfer goods and services setting a public hearing.

[3:41:58] Motion. I know there's no discussion.

[3:42:04] So, Mary, can you read the motion? S19:

[3:42:26] 56 S19:

[3:42:46] I've got a second with Kurt. All in favor, say aye. Opposed? None. Passes 9 to 0. Jonathan. Town manager's report.

[3:42:58] The town staff has been. Town staff has been busy notifying farmers in town of the Connecticut Farm Recovery and Support Block Grant opportunity. So a lot of them have been appreciative of us calling and emailing, just reminding them of the opportunity to get some grant money. In addition to the vehicle that we talked about tonight under the, um, the transfer the town also purchased, uh, is going to purchase another vehicle. We received a grant for a new 15 passenger wheelchair accessible bus for the benefit of the town's Dial-a-ride program. The purchase price is about $150,000, with 114,000 approximately provided through the state grant. And so we're expected to get the new bus by the end of October. And that replaces a 2012 bus with about 111,000 miles. So that's great. Uh, the town has selected two consultants for the town revaluation. This is the revaluation that's going to be set for October 1st, 2027. That will those values will be set for five years. And so after going out to bid, the town selected two companies. We broke up the work between vision Government Solutions and municipal Valuation Services. That was done at the recommendation of the assessor, who thought that they were strong in certain areas. And so those contracts are signed and we'll get going with those companies. We'll also be doing a lot of communications to the public to to tell them well in advance what revaluation is, provide opportunities for people to be educated about this, because I'm sure there's going to be a lot of questions about this, especially with values increasing so much. Over the past several years, the town has signed a contract for the purchase of two fire apparatus and will be purchased from Farm Supply Company, Inc. at Pierce manufacturing. The Board of Fire Commissioners did vote to approve the purchase at its meeting held September 3rd, 2026, and this, of course, was a multi-month process involving members of the fire department who were broken up into two separate teams evaluating the apparatus that they wanted.

[3:45:27] And so after the town, in terms of how we're going to finance this, um, Kerry Rowley has recommended that the town pay the cost up front and that we in order to save a achieve a significant discount, $243,510 S5:

[3:50:42] Thank you Jonathan. Any questions for the town manager Tom.

[3:50:49] Sorry. This is in regards to the town manager.

[3:50:51] Right right right right right right. Well you mentioned that the town did well. You also mentioned apparently that the Board of Finance did well. You gave us a figure for the town.

[3:51:05] Do you have a figure for the Board of Finance for the Board of Education? S22:

[3:51:07] I believe it's in there.

[3:51:08] For the public.

[3:51:10] 2.1.

[3:51:12] 2.1 let me just find it.

[3:51:15] 2.1.

[3:51:16] 2.1 million in Board of Education savings approved for transfer to the Unexpected Education 2% fund.

[3:51:27] Any other questions for the town clerk?

[3:51:31] John.

[3:51:31] John. Go ahead.

[3:51:33] I was just going to check in and ask about. Heard anything about a doggy pound. They're down there doing.

[3:51:40] That's that's under comments.

[3:51:44] I learned my.

[3:51:44] Lesson last.

[3:51:45] Week. Kurt.

[3:51:47] Thank you. Um item six on the fire apparatus purchase I'm trying to understand is fire medic an agent, and they're building a pierce. Uh, we're paying fire medic. But Pierce is building the apparatus.

[3:52:04] What's actually is occurring here? S5:

[3:52:08] Um, and so the savings are going to be eaten up on the purchase of the apparatus because of lack of interest when we use the cash. And you mentioned some, uh 31000 for bond issue.

[3:52:23] Yeah.

[3:52:24] So just a little bit more explanation.

[3:52:26] Yeah. So we buy paying up front for the apparatus. We receive the $243,510 discount. Yeah, there's a loss of interest. And in that money being spent. But even when factoring that loss of interest and factoring in other costs, such as the cost associated with issuing the bonds, we still will save an estimated $138,000 by paying that upfront and getting the that discount.

[3:53:00] Wouldn't the bond, um, fee occur anyhow?

[3:53:06] It would. Yeah. And we factored that in.

[3:53:09] Mhm. Um what else.

[3:53:16] Okay. Um. Oh is that coming out of unassigned fund balance or is that money being borrowed to pay in cash.

[3:53:26] It's not being borrowed. So it's coming. It's coming from our resources. I have to check if it's coming out of unassigned fund balance in particular, but it is coming from our, our our cash resources.

[3:53:42] Does that require our action in the Board of Finance?

[3:53:45] I asked Kerry about that and she said no.

[3:53:47] Okay. Um, on the item 13, the the bridge, I was under the impression that they were going to discontinue the bridge. I'm reading this that they're actually going to tear the bridge down.

[3:54:06] I will get clarification on that.

[3:54:08] AM I? Does anybody else remember that it was going to be discontinued.

[3:54:12] And torn.

[3:54:13] Down and torn down?

[3:54:15] I remember it was going to be torn down.

[3:54:19] I do remember us inquiring about whether or not we could keep it up. And I think the answer was no. We were thinking about putting a mural on it or something of that, to that effect.

[3:54:29] I just thought I heard that they were going to discontinue it. I want to personally give a shout out to Lisa and Katherine Albert. I know Lisa's been here several times. She's a very diligent in her job and she does excellent work. So congratulations to her. I want to understand a little bit more about the year end financials. Jonathan. Um.

[3:54:57] Expenditures finish approximately 3.3 million below budget. Leads me to believe that we're overtaxing our citizens, including myself. Um.

[3:55:11] Is that accurate? All 3.3 million below what we budgeted.

[3:55:16] Including the Board of Education, projected $2.1 million.

[3:55:21] So that's combined.

[3:55:22] Yes.

[3:55:22] All right. So they're going to board of Education is going to have 2.1 million in savings, in addition to the reduction that we offered. We gave them. That's pretty much outstanding.

[3:55:36] Um.

[3:55:40] That's all I have. Thank you.

[3:55:43] Any other questions for the town manager? Uh, I only have one. Jonathan. Um, well, actually, I'm going to say two. One. Uh, to piggyback off of Kurt for the route 17, um, off ramp closure, can you just state it for the public? So hopefully it gets maybe out there a little bit more when that's closing.

[3:56:06] I will, I will do that. I will speak with the person managing the project and get confirmation on demolition and when it will close.

[3:56:15] And then, but the off ramp is currently slated to close October 1st.

[3:56:20] I will get I will ask for the most up to date dates on that.

[3:56:24] Okay. Um, and then if you could check item 18 in your report is underground utility work near Fern Street and Imperial Drive. Uh, and this is laying fiber optic. It jumped out at me because I live on Fern Street. Um, I don't know, maybe four years ago, five years ago, they were running the fiber optic there. They ran all the conduit for the underground lines. And then that's when they got into big trouble and had a stop order from the state because they were damaging other utility lines. Are they? And then they literally the conduit was sticking out of the ground for a year and a half, probably two years before they finally buried it. Are they using that conduit or are they running new conduit is going to be my question.

[3:57:17] I'll look into that.

[3:57:18] If you could follow up, that would be great. I mean, the fact that they're running flags does kind of assume that they're probably digging again, which, um, concerns me a little bit. But, uh, if you could find that out, that'd be great. Uh, any other questions for the town manager? Yes, John.

[3:57:38] Oh, just a quick follow up on your point about the closure of the exit, I think was your point. Like, like, it doesn't seem to have been communicated widely enough. I don't I don't take that exit regularly, so I don't know if there's like signs posted. And it's like once that exit closed, people are going to have to like go across two lanes to take the correct like to the take the roundabout exit. And like, I hope that like they have a plan, um, and.

[3:58:04] Like.

[3:58:06] Bridge.

[3:58:06] Out.

[3:58:08] And then you just like fly over and then you like fall. Um, but no, um, I don't know, John and I know that the town has put out a notice through the town communication and um, just, just, I don't know if you could just check like what else they're doing to to get the word out. Will do. Thanks.

[3:58:25] Just speed up and make the jump. John. Um, did you have. Are you good? Do you have any other questions or for the.

[3:58:34] Just an update on anything if we've.

[3:58:37] Next for.

[3:58:39] The next item.

[3:58:40] Yeah. Hold on. We need we need a motion real quick to extend.

[3:58:44] Motion to extend to 12. I mean 1115.

[3:58:48] Is not going to be enough time.

[3:58:50] Guys.

[3:58:51] Like. Yeah. All right.

[3:58:53] Well then I'm going to say a 1120 like let's keep it tight people.

[3:59:02] I've got a second with Anthony. Any discussion? Seeing none. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed. Seeing none. 9 to 0 on extension. Okay. Now moving on to town councilor. Comments. John.

[3:59:19] Just, uh. Any updates or anything? Have you heard anything on the dog pound? I just want to remind folks you're doing hard time down there. No one's voicing for them. That's it. That's all.

[3:59:32] Any other town council comments?

[3:59:35] Um, so I know that the Neighborhood Assistance Act program was approved by the state for, um, the tax benefits for businesses who want to donate into our affordable housing trust fund. So I was just curious if you have heard any town manager, if you've heard any interest in that, and I believe that deadline is also October 1st. Uh, so I'm just hopeful that maybe something will come through.

[4:00:00] Okay.

[4:00:02] Any other town council comments? Tom.

[4:00:05] At the last meeting, we had the developer for the 8-30G Hopewell Road project come to the council and make an interesting proposal, and I would be Interested in knowing some additional details in terms of what that individual was proposing. Given the cost of affordable units, it may be in the town's financial interest to entertain what that proposal might be.

[4:00:36] Any other comments, Curt?

[4:00:39] Yeah.

[4:00:39] Um, Jonathan, when I saw the encumbrance carry forward, I wanted to ask if, um, you had sent out the suspense list that we talked about previously. I don't recall seeing it electronically. You were going to send it out.

[4:00:58] I will if I have, I'll check.

[4:00:59] If I have not, I will.

[4:01:01] Okay.

[4:01:02] Any other comments? Seeing none. Uh, committee reports. I don't have anything for the chairman's report. MDC Krog.

[4:01:11] No report.

[4:01:12] Board of education. Facilities Committee report.

[4:01:14] Committee will be meeting in early October, so maybe I'll have an update next time.

[4:01:19] Okay. No communications. Can you read the motion for the minutes?

[4:01:23] Be it resolved that the Town Council hereby approves the amended minutes of September 8th, 2026 regular meeting.

[4:01:30] I got a second with Curt. Any discussion? Seeing none. All in favor, say aye. Opposed? And 9 to 0. Uh, and then we are on to executive session.

[4:01:44] Can you read the motion? S19:

[4:02:11] Second with an objection.

[4:02:14] Okay.

[4:02:15] The the Griswold Street item, I don't believe should be discussed in executive session. That letter was is a public document, not the town attorney's letter, but the the attorney that sent it to us. If they want to do a zone change, there is a process and it's a public process. And we should not be discussing that privately without the public's participation.

[4:02:36] Okay. Any discussion? Further discussion? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Nay. 8 to 1.

Town Council 9/22/2026

Transcript