Plan & Zoning - Regular Meeting

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the September 16, 2025 meeting of the Orangetown Plan and Zoning Commission. I am Commissioner Azie Parent, and with us this evening, Tom Torrenti, Paul Kaplan, Jenny Bowser, Recording Secretary, Court Reporter, Kevin Cornell, Jay Magcguire, Jack Emer, zoning administrator. All right, thank you. First item on our agenda tonight is a review of the minutes from the September 2nd, 2025 meeting.

I had more of a question. Yeah. that's not in so the first topic we had discussed was the sewer referral uh for you know replacing that bullhill y and I recall in the discussion that we were told not only were the repairs going to be a subject of the special uh the special assessment but that the installation of the sewer would also Yeah. I mean I think customarily when a city when any municipality installs sewers there's an assessment made against them

over a period of time. Yeah. Payable over a period of time which I think they assured us that would happen in this case. All right. It's just not in the Yeah. On the last line, it says there was a letter sent to the property owners notifying them for the upcoming repairs and it be charged over a period of time special assessment. Uh but that is relating to the if it's in if it's in the par it's in the paragraph whose subject is the repairs. Would it would it help if we said repairs or replacement?

I I I'm waiting for counselor to to speak. I already did. I didn't I speak? I thought you did. Oh, you did speak again. Oh, okay. What's the question? The question is that clearly or in the paragraph where you said there was a letter sent to the property owners notifying of upcoming repairs and they would be charged over a period of time a special assessment that that relates to the repairs. I don't see where there's any mention of replacing repairs. There was a discussion of that. I do remember that. And that would be typical.

So again, could could we say repairs andor uh Well, we don't we didn't see the letter, so we can't put it in that paragraph, right? No, not not if it's He's describing the letter, right? Oh, I see what you're saying. Uh, okay. Okay. How about how about how about the last sentence of the Yes. First paragraph. No. Or the second paragraph. It begins. Attorney Weaver explained

the last sentence. Due to the condition of the sewer and ongoing town maintenance. The WPCA is considering extending their sewer line and build or should be building a brand new sewer line to service these properties for which they would be paid subject to a special over time. Yeah. Does that work? Yes. For me it does. All right. You got that Jenny. Okay. The same language on the bottom of the Okay. So, put that up there or just leave it there, too. No, he was describing the he was describing the letter, so you leave that alone, but the same language could be uh put on the bottom of that of that second paragraph. Yeah. Okay, sounds good. Got it.

Yes. Thank you. Okay. I I had no comments on the uh the minutes. Anybody else? No. Okay, then a motion to approve with the uh amendment noted. So moved. Second. Second. It's been seconded. All those in favor? I I Okay.

All right. Next item on our agenda is a is old business. Anyone have anything that they'd like to bring up under that topic? Uh we had a brief discussion uh after a very nice presentation by uh Barbara and uh Owen regarding the pending legislation. Uh Jack, what is if we decided to if we had some language to make some changes, what's the timeline? It has to be if if we're going to change a zoning text, could you go run through the timeline for me, please?

Sure. Um, once we have finalized the language, our draft language that we want to uh send notice to the uh regional planners, adjacent municipality, you know, anybody required, you're looking at a month. They have 30 days or 35 days to review that language before they give us a referral. It could be less. If they have their meeting within a week of us referring that language to them, we can act from there. But we we give it 30 days, 35 days because that's typically around what they take anyways. Then it has to be scheduled for a public hearing.

Then it's got to be scheduled for a public hearing which adds another two weeks if we don't know, you know, when that is going to be able to appear. So we have a month for the notice to SCROG and then an additional two weeks for the notice of public hearing. So the under over is say two to three months after you have something to I think we average about a month and a half to two months for once you have a a final amendment. Right. Okay. So let's call it a three-month process. So if we're going to uh if this special legislative session's three weeks from now, there's no reason not to wait, right? And then start and then figure it out.

Okay. Yeah. Otherwise, I feel like we're spend I feel like uh given our luck, maybe it won't happen. You listen, who knows what's going to happen. I'd rather wait for the given the timeline that Well, you wouldn't we wouldn't be doing Yeah. We wouldn't achieve anything in 3 weeks anyway. Yeah. It's kind of a moving target, right? Yeah. All right. Obviously, if there's another delay for any reason and you know, it's we get another six months, obviously, that's something we could address then, right? Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yep. Okay. Anything else under old business? How about under new business? Okay. Uh, item four, report of the zoning enforcement officer. I

don't have anything for you tonight. Anybody has anything for me? I think we can get to our public hearings. All right. You're in. Let's do that. Uh, next item on our agenda. Uh, we're going to open a public hearing. Kevin, would you start us off by reading the legal notice? We got to change this to see. Yeah, I I will make I will make a note of that.

Notice is hereby given that on Tuesday, September 16th at 700 p.m. at the Orange Town Hall, 617 Orange Center Road, the Orange Town Planning and Zoning Commission will conduct a public hearing on the following. The Town Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing with representatives of BFJ Planning, the town's planning consultant for the plan of conservation and development revision. The purpose of this public hearing is to seek final comments from the TPZC and feedback from the broader Orange community regarding the final draft of the new plan of conservation and development. The draft plan of conservation and development can be found at the town's website and reference copies are available in the library and town clerk's office. Copy of this notice has been filed with the Orangetown Clerk and additional information is on file with the Orange Zoning Department dated in Orange, Connecticut the second day of September 2025.

All right, great. Thank you. All right, let's uh start our meeting uh our public hearing uh with I'd like to introduce Frank Fish who's headed up our uh consulting firm in putting the plan of the new plan of conservation development together. Well, if you want to come to the Oh, podium. come to the podium [Music]

just for um members of the public but also the commission all has a copy of uh everybody who came in tonight just got a copy of this. All it is is a a sort of four-page brief uh overview of what a plan of conservation and development is. Uh the first page is who's doing it, namely yourselves. Under Connecticut state law, only a PNZ or a planning commission can adopt the plan. And then um the really second page that goes into public engagement that we went through for the plan, the public workshops on the second page are reviewed, you know, up on the top of the page, public survey, and then a lot of stakeholder interviews that we did. And then the plan outline is just given those chapters uh one through nine. Uh and that the key is that this is all of these as the chapters were done and reviewed by you that they were then put online by Jack so that uh the whole process was to be iterative and public would have a chance to read chapters chapter by chapter and if they didn't then they come to either the public workshops and particularly workshop two went through the survey results and and the and the chapters. I don't think I mean I know the commission has seen our timeline at about every meeting but there is a timeline here which basically goes through the one-year process that we developed and how the public outreach was done, the survey was done um and then the chapter's draft plan and final plan. So um there is on the back page just a fourpoint sort of town of Orange strives to that's sort of a vision statement that's in the plan. We've condensed it here a little bit, but it's it's uh in the plan as the vision for uh the town. So, with that, this is the formal um public hearing, and I think

after the hearing, the commission's free to close the hearing um and then we would be in a position to produce or discuss with you any changes or um and then we can produce final final copies of the report for you. So, that's the uh that's the overall um Okay. Has everybody on the commission gotten a chance to look over this last draft? I had a few things that very minor, I think, um relatively uh that that I'd like to just go over and and maybe take all our comments at the same time. Do you want to respond or I don't mean respond. I mean,

yeah, I I would Sorry. What I Mr. Chairman, I I just suggest that you hear the public uh first if if you're okay on that. Hear the public first, close the hearing. Yeah. Uh and then we might have an opportunity with you to just go over all comments received, including comments from the public tonight. And you may want to um have us make some changes. For instance, there might be a typo or there might be uh there's uh two uh comments from the regional planning agency. They're very minor. We just need to know how to how to address those. So, all right. Well, I'm happy to take the public's uh comment first. Um but I'd like to have a discussion amongst ourselves and raise the questions we have.

Yeah. Oh, yeah. Before we close the public hearing. Okay. All right. Thank you. So then uh is there any anyone in the public uh this evening who wishes to uh speak regarding the plan of conservation and development? Yes sir. Yeah. Please come to the podium and thank you very much. Introduce yourself.

Uh my name is Dr. Lawrence Msina Orange Land Trust President. Thank you very much for this evening's meeting. I think uh BFJ has done an amazing job uh getting information from the public uh also uh conversing with town officials and uh as president of the land trust uh we have a lot of confidence in the direction that we're going in. The state is looking to at least keep around 20 to 21% open space. Uh so the town of Orange is very focused on doing that and uh preserving of course one of my favorite farms, the Fieldview Farm. I think I had told uh the group that the farm has been in in existence since 1639. So hopefully it'll remain in the town. Uh but uh I want to thank you all for all that you've done and we'll continue moving on into the right direction for the future of the town of Orange. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Could you spell your last name for us, please? Uh, M E SS I N A. Thank you very much. My pleasure. Thank you. All right. Very good. Um, so in how do how should we handle this? I mean, the first comment I have is on page 20. Do we have comments specifically that anybody wants to raise or should we go through the uh I also have comments. So all right, however we want to do it.

I I guess All right. Let's let's start on on page 20 then. 3.4.2 the second uh phrase there examine potential this is talking about uh land use regulations and and land use regulations need regular review and updates to ensure consistency. Uh in this 3.4.2 two talks about uh examining potential regulatory changes to address common non-conforming uses. I wasn't quite sure what that

I think what this was targeting, you know, less I think uses may be the wrong word there, less non-conforming uh buildings. But I I seem to remember through this process we were discussing how a lot of residential properties in Orange are severely undized to today's code. Mhm.

So no matter what these homeowners come in to do, whether it's a minor addition or a small garage for shed for storage, they end up having to get variances because they are so severely uh you know limited by their property and needing today's code that pretty much whenever somebody comes in to me with a certain property uh I say well expect you're going to need a variance because there's basically no way for us to make this improvement to meet the code. Okay. So, I think that's what that was targeting. If that, you know, maybe uh to examine potential regulatory changes to address common non-conforming situations, maybe a better word. I'm I'm not exactly targeting uses there.

Yeah. Partials. The the intent wasn't to to address uses, but No, but the partial var Yeah, that parcels could be a a good way to put it as well. You mean non-conforming buildings? My idea was more towards buildings, but you know, parcels could work as well because, you know, it's really specific pieces that So, Jack, if if I was to try to rephrase it, when the original housing stock of Orange was built on halfacre lots

and the code was rewritten to an acre and a half that some of the bulk area regulations applied to existing parcels make them they're already nonconformed. Right. So you'd be enlarging a nonconformity. Yes. If you allowed somebody to put a deck on or you know which would be actually a common amenity but for the fact of when the house was built, right? Exactly. And the conditions that occurred at that time. So what are we? So we keep the language except that last word. Yeah. Do you want to chime in on this? Uh

just we got Frank. Maybe that's a better way to maybe we should. Yeah, if we could join us at the table.

Just do your best to have a microphone in front of you. I'm going to take care of that right now. All right. Why don't you sit over here? All right. And just keep your voice. I I just wasn't clear on, you know, what we're I think how Kevin put it is exactly how I would like this to read. If if we're not comfortable with the current language, Yeah. I think we can make small adjustments. Does that make sense to you, Frank? Yeah. Yeah. Because that is the issue. At first I thought you were looking at changing the word uses to just building. He needs you to turn on the microphone. Oh, make sure the green button is on here. Down here.

Down here. There you go. You got it. Okay. I thought where you were going with that is change the word. The last word in 3.4.2 is uses. Change it to buildings. But that's what I understand. I think parcels may may work. Parcels would work better. Okay. Uh, as long as we're on page 20, do you mind? No, that's

okay. So, uh, this this occurs multiple places, but it starts on page 20. So, I just I want to throw it out to the group. Um, you know, this exercise had, you know, has, you know, some very, you know, positive aspects to it in that one, it's an obligation of us to the state, but it's also a good document for ourselves to check with

the the the rest of Orange and make sure we're all headed in rowing the boat in the same direction. Uh, but I also look at this to try and a avoid smart lawyers using language to beat us uh about the head and shoulders on special permits for things that are in compliance with the plan of conservation and development. Mhm.

So I would like everyone to consider one the word mixeduse development shows up in multiple location. Okay. And it's only defined in one thing as a combination of uh commercial uh

residential residential and uh retail. Okay. So common construction would mean if it's only defined in one place that every time it shows up that's what it means. And what I'd like the group to be thinking about is okay number one do we want to have that do we really want to encourage that first do we want the definition of mixeduse to include residential? Yes. No. If it doesn't include it and it's just mixes of different things in the same uses in the same building but not residential, some of my concerns go away.

Well, that wouldn't that be wouldn't that be the common uh definition of mixed use? It is that's why I'm bringing it to everyone's attention that so now the question becomes okay if you're okay with the concept of mixed use are you only uh comfortable with it in our commercial zone are you comfortable with it in our industrial zone are you commercial comfortable with it in our residential zone because it shows up in multiple places in multiple different context. Okay. So, the discussion I wanted to have is number one, do we all agree that mixed use includes residential? And if it does, we should look carefully in here where it shows up to make sure that it's in that's in conformance.

Are you so your your discussion starts with 3.1.2? That that is the first place of where mixed use comes up. Yes. So the verbiage afterward which says we're appropriate really doesn't respond to your concerns. My concern. So so if you if we decide collectively that it's appropriate on route one leaving it in as 3.3.1 would be appropriate. Right. Okay. But then it having it at 3.1.2 too only begs the question of

well they have it somewhere else just after talking about single family neighborhoods so they must mean it's okay up there too. Where do you see that? 3.1.2 3.1.2 comes in under existing community character. Got it. The lead of which is existing f single family neighborhoods. Then it immediately goes into mixed use. Yeah. Okay.

Right. So to me I would leave it out it again assuming mixed use is okay on route one leave it there but but the repetition of it in other places where it could be interpreted to want to have that in residential neighborhoods which I personally would not be interested in encouraging right you know it have to be something pretty special to encourage for me. So, so I would say first, do we agree with the definition? It includes residential the common parliament.

That is common parliament. So, that's what we're going with. So, every time we see it, yeah, may have to may have to define a little further. Well, no, I'm saying I would take it out of 3.1.2 two and if we decide it is appropriate on route one I'd leave it in 3.3.1 but then it comes up again and you know I I don't want to can I jump around but I don't mean to interrupt but can I ask I know you raised this before you discussed it at some length and we changed this wording for you before and we added under 3.1.2 too. We added comma where appropriate. That's why we put that in there.

Okay. Well, and again, I'm just going over So, I'm looking at the final draft before it's adopted, right? And we're all having an overall discussion on a topic that occurs in more than one location. So, I'm starting with definitions, going through each location, and and people may decide, you know, I might think It's needlessly repetitive and four people might say, "You're an idiot. Leave it in." Okay? And that's perfectly fine. But I want to just kind of hit all the areas. But the only way to answer the question is to look at each each line each time it's used. Each time mixeduse comes up.

I I have no problem with the way it's written here. Okay. And because of the addition of the of the words where appropriate. I mean and everybody else comfortable comfortable comfortable I am okay it's also encourage doesn't say if it's encourage were appropriate right well I if it's if it works for everybody else

let me just explore because I I don't remember exactly what we had discussed but on the 3.1.2 two. Okay. This is for maintaining existing community character. So do you do you see that as only residential? I I think that when you bracket when you when you say what do you mean residential? You mean the residential zone? The residential zone. And so, so when I see

when I see two bracketed by one and three, which talk about character as a rural hamlet and existing single family neighborhoods, I I look at that totality of that as talking about the major uses in the town of Orange, which is single family homes. Would it Can I try to cut through this because we had we spent an hour on this at the last meeting. I don't mean to sound impatient, but could we say for instance I think this was meant to start with preserve single family neighborhoods. That was a main goal. Yes.

But in addition to that goal of preserve single family neighborhoods, then encourage mixeduse development where it's appropriate. Now maybe what we could say is encourage mixed use of development where it's appropriate such as in commercial areas. Well they so or be more specific of it. What I'm trying to say is I don't see a there's there's a I don't see a conflict. There's a major goal here to preserve single family residential neighborhoods. That's what we're saying. And then you go to mixed use like along Route One. We want mixed use on Route One. You have it there, right? So I don't So So here's the thing and maybe it's just

the way I approached the construct of the entire document, okay? Is I think that people should have the discussion, count noses, and keep the language and move on. But I think I want them all to be conscious decisions. Okay? And if four people are comfortable and I'm less comfortable, we keep the language and it's great. We move on. I'm not like trying to make this a personal stamp thing. I'm just want to So, you're going to have to point out Yes, that's what I'm going to do. I mean, I I didn't I didn't

that that I didn't focus on that. I mean, that didn't strike me as an issue as I read through the entire Well, so, but let's take as an example. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying. Yeah. Let's take as an example the the the situation I see in the future uh is the same thing that came up during uh the fire light thing.

All right. you get a good attorney who knows how to hit every point on a special permit uh you know sort of application and use the POC as a tool I don't want to say against you in in her client's favor but that's what we but we didn't get we didn't get burned on the fire light I mean we're very happy with what we approved there right I mean maybe not everybody's very We approved it. I think we went to court and we were told to approve it finally. Was that No, I think that was a straightaway approved. There was before I think there was a denial. Yeah.

The first time around and then a settlement was reached by the applicant in the board on a on a density, you know, unit per acre number that that we were comfortable with. Right. Right. Well, but we weren't adverse to the idea of a mixeduse

development there. So again, This might be just something that So I see things like words that lead towards encouraging an expansion of the sewer district. Okay. Outside of its current boundaries, which means into the residential zone. Okay. in the POC as a future issue for us if we have no interest in extending that. Okay,

that's a different issue, right? It's a different issue, but it's it similarly comes up later, but I'm just trying to tie it because it all comes into

having control over where multifamily housing goes in this the town. Okay. And so encouraging it along route one because it makes sense from transportation network, bus routes, uh you know, vacancy because commercials evolving, retail is evolving and you know just plain makes sense. All right. But I I'm just looking forward to when people try to do things outside that what what tools are they going to find to support their case in this document. So I just wanted to go through them and if we're comfortable we're comfortable move on. We don't have to spend

15 minutes. If you guys are all comfortable I I'm comfortable with what we have in three bingo. Let's move to everybody else comfortable with that. No. So I was right. Yeah. And then I started looking at it and I said, "Well, if I took it out, what do I lose?" So, if the risk is what what Kevin is saying, there's there's there's possible risk there. So, I said, "Well, what if we took it out? What do we lose?" He's talking about 3.1.2. Yeah. What if we took it out? What do we lose? Cuz three lines down, four lines down, it says promote mixeduse development on Route One, which whenever you talk about I don't mean to point Paul. or whenever you talk about it, you say on route one, right? Yeah.

So, it's on route one down below. So, why do I need it in 3.1.2? Just take it out. It's not adding anything at that point. And if there's risk on the other side of it, then don't leave it in, right? Take it out. At first, I was like, "Oh, come on. It says wear appropriate. It's very weak." But that's another part of it is it's not doing anything. And if there's any kind of risk associated with it, then take it out because it's not gaining us anything. That's how I'm looking at it now to get to the odd side of this. But yeah. No. And and and again, it's we can go through the places it shows up real quick

and then decide on them individually or one at a time, whatever you want to do. I don't Well, let's go through the document. I understand I understand yours and Jay's point. I mean, you hit it home pretty pretty good. Um, great. Well, but Fire Light's not on Route One. No. So, I mean, but it's in the sewer zone, appropriate,

right? I I'm comfortable with the language. I mean, and that's I understand, but your I mean, your point is is is there and it can be tortured and we've all seen God knows we lived through the uh what was that the TOD and how that was tortured. I think that preceded you, but I watched it happen. All right. So, we got 22 and Tom can say keep it in

or I think we Yeah. Fine. I I guess where I come down on it, and maybe I'm missing the boat, but if you tried to do that in a resident's district, just by virtue of the requirements, you wouldn't be able to. Or am I wrong? It depends. The way the state is moving, we're getting less and less discretion over where we allow these sorts of development. So within the next 10 years, we may get pushed to say, "Hey, you know, there's your your local requirements are, you know, we're we're no longer listening to them. You just have to comply to the state."

So then we have we only have this to turn back on. We say, "All right, well, is this appropriate here?" We could say no. We could say yes. But I don't like relying on local regulations because we're quickly learning that those are getting phased out by the state. But if if that legislation passes, this is that 3.1.2 is moved. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. We we only control what we control. All right. I mean, it's a very simple statement and it's very subject to interpretation and it gives it doesn't take away a lot of the commission's discretion. No. But they language of where appropriate. I think. Yeah. Well, I mean, absolutely.

How about I mean, instead of saying I mean, do we what's our feeling on that? Do we do we feel that we want to encourage that type of development? Let's say a fire light that's a mixeduse. Are we interested in encouraging that type of development in town of Orange where appropriate? If if not, uh if not, maybe encourage is the wrong word. we should say consider or I don't know. Yeah, but I don't think it I don't think I don't care how any lawyer can look through this this plan of conservation and find things that support his position. Absolutely. and we could find things. Yeah, that's all I'm saying. I'm not

But and again, you know, you know, I it at the end of the day, if three people say keep it in, let's just move on. I I I'm not like it's not like I don't think like this is, you know, an imminent risk. I'm just want it to be a conscious decision to leave in or take out. That's all. Yeah. I mean it well so you got two leave there takeouts Tommy I mean the the site that comes to mind is Orange Center. Yeah you're talking that's the only other one that's possible I think about mixed use potentially mixed use there. Yeah. So leave it in that if you're so

I think it's where appropriate and that's actually fits in exactly to the the phrase but but it's mentioned the the idea of a project in that location is mentioned in in other places in the plan of conservation and development. So right it's obviously something we'd be interested in considering even encouraging. Right. All right. So okay. So can we move on then to those other places? So I think you're we're resolved on that. So page 43 the next time we talk about can I go to page well can we finish the mix topic or get something else I I wanted to take it in chronological I mean

okay never mind gone we'll just I just thought if it it shows up let me five more times all right well you have it noted so as we go through you. That's no problem. Go ahead.

Uh on page 24, the uh first line, second sentence, the town of Orange could encourage conservation subdivisions as a strategy to maintain existing housing density while preserving open space. I guess I I guess I just wanted to uh make sure that that's something we're we're mindful of. I mean are are you know it's it's deliberate on our part. All right. Gee, you sound familiar. Sorry, I get it.

I I actually like personally like uh the open space subdivision concepts just from a planning aspect. Uh certainly where the state's going. Well, I I think it's more that, you know, why not aggregate some, you know, in my culde-sac, if some of the land had have been aggregated in a more type of communal, like you can walk your dog in their way and the lots were smaller, I'd have less to mow, you know, is kind of how I look at it. But, uh, all right. So, the answer is we're we're comfortable with that. And it says could encourage.

Well, I'm comfortable. It's big. It's big enough for me. I don't I'm not don't don't care that much about what you got next. Again, uh this may opportunities for future economic growth on page 40. Again, it's I just pointed out as a as a a paragraph that I want to make sure we're mindful of it because which one are you talking about? Opportunities for future economic growth. Bottom of page.

And that talks about the Orange Shopping Center here. And again, I'm okay with it. Yeah, I think we made it less um it was a little personal the first the first draft. Right. Everybody comfortable with that language? Yes. All right, Kevin, you would stop me along the way if you uh Yeah, I have next thing I have is on 43. So, all right. Go ahead.

All right. 5.1.5 is where we uh define mixed use as integrating commercial residential and office. And I just wanted to uh make sure sorry preceding page I'm cheap I didn't print all the pages. Uh so since this is talking about uh strengthening the business base that usually and underutil have an extra copy of the plan here

thanks um you turn off all the sound it still makes noise just chuck it someplace. No it's not your fault. I'm sorry. Okay. No, it's very rude. The world isn't your phone. Um, so we've already decided that we're going to go with the common usage of uh mixed use being having those three components. And this is all talking about in business. Yeah.

And which is down the Route One corridor andor adjoining areas. So, uh, I would leave it the way it is. I have no problem with that. All right. My next, uh, observation was just a typo on page 65. The last sentence in the first paragraph, continuing to preserve these agricultural agricultural features is essential. I think you're missing the word to to support the rural character of the community. Got it. You got it.

Yep. Kevin, do you have anything else at this up to 66? Nope. My next thing is in the 80s. All right. I got page 82. Yep. There you go. Yeah. Any parcels proposed for development outside of the agreed upon sewer service areas would necessitate an amendment to the intermunicipal agreements. These amendments must be approved by the Orange Board of Selectmen. I circle the same thing. Yeah. I mean, um, it is true. It's a true statement.

Yes. And for that reason, I don't think I have any problem with it. Well, so again, I mean, it's it's an observation. It's it's it it is it is an observation and it's not saying whether any parcels outside the sewer service areas should be considered. But what does that true statement add to our document?

Well, it's just information. What we usually do, not always, but we try to give the lay reader just existing conditions, some knowledge of, you know, what the what what exists, what is the case. And that's what this was trying to do, I think, just say what as accurately as we could, you know, what exists. Now,

you're you're you're back to what happens if someone tries to torture the interpretation. Well, it's the introduction to the sewer the the sewer issue in multiple places. So, it it's introductory to some other comments about the sewers where if you're trying to build a a case, so to speak,

that uh I want to sell a piece of my golf course and we just need to run a lateral up XYZ road to turn this into, you know, some apartment complex,

right? you know, and it's like um you know, you you know, you start building it here where you say, well, I've already talked to West Haven and they have the capacity and then you say, you know, you're you're contemplating changing, you know, extending these things, you know, I don't know, it can stay or go, but it's introductory to to some other places where I think it's more important. All right. Then I guess we'll leave that at 82. Okay. All five. Okay.

I It It's a a statement of fact. I I understand they may start there, but it is what it is. I have just one other thing and that is on uh Oh, no. I just marked that so I knew where it was. No, I have nothing else. All right. Satisfied with my review.

So page 89 um uh under multif family residential. Uh so this comes up in the context of future land use plans.

Okay. So uh but for the post road 830Gs or affordable housing component things I have no interest in multifamily residential personally. Okay. Um you know because Unless there's something in it for the town like say Smith Farms which s is terrific. Yep.

Um so at the uh under multif family, you know, you're again to um gez I'm sorry um under Frank's sorry Frank uh Frank's statement that what they're trying to do is give the lay reader background on how things occur. You could look at the last uh statement. Uh since the town does not have its own sewer system, any future medium or high density development would necessitate an amendment to the agreements. All right. So you could look at that as just a statement of fact or I don't have any interest in extending the the the the agreements and this is kind of our document.

If we lost losing that line would that line doesn't add anything. It it is background information at best which has already been introduced in the last paragraph we looked at. Well, it's suggesting that if if if you're if you're proposing any high density uh use, you're going to need an inter municipal. But that's only if it occurs outside the current zone. No, because inside the current zone as shown on the map, there's capacity

and it doesn't need to be done. So to this only occur applies to properties that are outside of that zone. So what if we're not considering extending the zone, why do we want it is to all I'm asking. Well, then could you conceive of a waste treatment in a uh in a multif family project without uh without sewers. So, I mean it could work, right? The last time Well, it's done all the time in other states, right? Uh specifically Long Island, like we discussed last time,

but the last time I checked, Connecticut D did not allow it. Now, that information is about five years old. Uh, but I I would think that that language would be valuable in a situation where you want to direct a developer to the sewer system uh for waste treatment as opposed to a you know oversized I don't know what how you would it's called a ditrification plant. Basically, it's a package sewage treatment plant. Yeah. and they uh get picked they pick up the solids like they go to your septic tank.

Yeah. So I mean so what it say since the town does not have its own sewer system any future medium or highdensity development would necessitate an amendment to the intermunicipal that's true that's true again it's not true inside the current I know but all it's saying is that to the extent you want to uh you want to uh you want to go yeah well I mean we could get capacity there.

The the capacity currently exists with you know now if you add a person do you have to amend the whole agreement? I do not know but I did not get that from our primmer last meeting. But to me, you know, you only ha, you know, have to change the amendment if it's outside the current zone of the of the agreement. How would you So what what's your concern? What?

So my concern is since we only want since we're only looking for this type of development inside the current sewer agreement zone which is the commercial zone along Route One and maybe like some towards the industrial.

Yeah. Um that since and if that occurs, there doesn't have to be a change to the intermunicipal agreement as long as you're under the capacity and we're way under the capacity of the agreements from what I understand. Then this language only becomes true outside of the current sewer agreement zone. All right. So you don't want to you don't want the suggestion out there that you were thinking about expanding that zone of expanding the sewer zone or

the yeah expanding the inter municipal the intermunicipal agreement applies to a very specific area shown on one of these maps. Yeah, we show where it is probably 83. Yeah, on page 83. Yeah. Right. So we're if we're trying to encourage this the the the the multif family to happen in that zone and it's covered by the agreement. This sentence to me suggests that we're considering allowing it to come north into the residential zone. Do do we have any

I don't see that written here. Okay. Well, so what so what it says I get okay is any future medium or high density development will necessitate an amendment to the municipal agreement. Correct? Yes. The municipal agreement only applies to this shaded area on page 83. If you have to amend it, it means it's happening outside of that area. It suggests that suggested that we would consider right a high density project outside of that area. Right. Right. So, and we I don't think we do.

I'm sorry to drag this on. No, it is what it is. Do Did we change this language before? What? What was here before? I'm sorry. No, I don't believe it was changed. I think the we are I mean since we already introduced it in the previous chapter um I mean I don't see an issue with just removing that last line or um I mean do we want a more affirmative statement? Yeah. Or saying something like um it would necessitate an assessment of possible capacity or something along those lines rather than saying it would necessarily necessitate an amendment.

Yeah, it could. Yeah, you could do that. So instead it would say since the town does not have its own sewer system any future medium or high density development would necessitate an assessment of capacity limits or something like that. Yeah I mean that is the intent. There's a little you will come up with better light. Yeah. But that was very good on the fly because that contains it within the zone. Yes. All right. Good. Thank you very much.

Anything else? Uh yeah sorry page 91 and again this is oh the implementation matrixes appears to be just an echo from page 20 yeah 3.1.2 two. Okay. So, so the implementation matrix, it's just the concentration of all of the recommendations. So, if you change it one place, you'll change it. Yes. Precisely. Y never mind. All right. That's why it looked like it was coming in a lot. All right. Uh and so Okay. Yep.

All right. Did do the commissioners have any additional comments on the plan? I have one. Go ahead. Right inside the front cover. Frank just changed the definition. That's an important inside the Judy's still in there. Jay Magguire. Yes. You said we wanted to keep Judy in there though. Yeah, I thought so. Yeah, I think so. Yeah, she worked on it. We would add Jay's name. Yeah. Keep Judy's name. Sorry, Judy.

All right. Are there are there um letters or emails that we have from from the community? There there are Kevin, do you want to go over or do you want us to We've got I think I think you guys want the the only input we got was uh forwarded to me from the board of selectmen, but it was from one selectman who I think it was more just for discussion within their board, but it was passed along to me anyways. So, we may want to just discuss it while we're here. Um so Suzanne can go through that. Good. All right. And then the one other item was just the um referral from uh Scrog. Scrog

and they had um just one comment that we might want to consider or one or two. All right, let's do that. What do you want to do first? Want to do We'll do the the email first. The email first. Yeah. Okay. Pull that up.

Okay. So, this was received um from Mitchell Goldblat um and um sent on June 28th. So, there's a list of um observations here. Um one of which was regarding the photos. Um so, just so you know, once we get all the final feedback, we're then going to put this into a different format that once all the changes are made that's a little bit more professional, a little more polished looking. So, we will add additional photos, but if any of you have photos that we could include, um please send them to us. Any photos that represent um you know, Mor's natural beauty or anything else that could be could add something to the plan. Um that would be appreciated. That was a a uh comment from the board of selectmen that we received was additional photos if anyone had them.

All right. Yeah. Sometimes in a town there's you know, you may know someone. We asked we asked Jack. I don't know any talent photographers. There's nothing. So it's we do our best if if I don't know if you want to ask the first select. I think I directed Suzanne to to Ann Denny. You know she's she would have a you know all the boards that you know may have photos or she she would be the one to point in the right direction. All right. Yeah, we can reach out. Don't they have a photo thing at the town fair coming up? Here you go. It's not good for us. Yeah.

Um the next one was there was a typo. There's a reference to Derby Hill Road should be corrected to Derby Milford Road on page 46. Um

so um under minor arterial after Grassy Hill Road, it says Derby Hill Road. So that should that just should say Derby Milford. Mhm.

Just a typo. Um, okay. Then on page 58, recommendation 6.5.2 refers to uh the planned sidewalks on Post Road. And the comment says, "I'm not sure that this is still part of the plan. But even if it is, I do not feel that sidewalks along the Post Road will be utilized and will be a burden to property owners. Also, while I do not want to see the walking paths on Orange Center Road extended, I do not think we want actual sidewalks and question the feasibility and practicality of extending either all the way from town hall to Route 1 as proposed in recommendation 6.5.3. Well, Route One, the state does have, you know, plans right now on the sidewalks, but but the our the POC, your PCD, he's correct, do do support those plans.

Um, by by the way, I should say on all these comments, like the comments we get to on Scrugg, they're all in your purview. They're up to you whether you agree with them or not. So, we just I think it's good to go through all of these comments to make sure you agree. If you don't agree, we would not put it in the plan or we would not change it. Um, I will say that um the one thing in the plan that he is also talking about is a sidewalk from I believe from uh post route one the post road up to here. Yeah.

To the hamlet. We did discuss that in the transportation table at the second workshop. Um we got I mean we we heard agreement on that but that's not a new recommendation of us right that's in your existing plan. It was it has been discussed at least the two times that we went through the um that I've gone through the um plan of conservation development. It's been a a goal albeit a slow moving one. So I I have no problem with it continuing to be a goal. Yeah, I agree.

Okay, great. Um the next comment is on page 63. Um we refer to these as private golf courses, but there actually is a mix of public and private golf courses in here. So they would like to include um Grassy Hill and Orange Hills as public golf courses and then add Race Brook Racebrook Country Club included amongst the list of private golf courses. So I presume we would just change the heading of this to golf courses and then differentiate between the private and public ones if that's or even just call them golf courses throughout. Okay. Yeah, we don't need to say private golf courses. Yeah, delete that. Public or public? Yeah, private or public. Yes. Yeah. Um,

okay. So, that one's taken care of. The next one, um, is something we've talked about a little bit. On page 84, recommendation 8.4.1 says that we should maintain the capacity of Orange's public and public water and sewer systems. I would disagree with that first part and believe we should be exploring ways to extend Orange's public water

as a taxpaying citizen. who has no access to those things. I would love to be able to expand the water system. I'm just saying. So, you guys reached out to the various municipal departments. Did the water department mention that as a goal? No. In our conversation with DPW, it doesn't stand out to me. conversation with them. We can check our minutes to that. Um, I don't recall them. I don't recall them saying that, but we we we'd need to just check it.

We need to check our We have a meeting record for all of these. So, Jack, I don't know if you uh know either. I mean, isn't that more of a not a orange issue? No, no, not an not a not a zoning issue. It doesn't the public in that part of the infrastructure is outside of our purview. Well, I mean, implementing it certainly is, but I would find I would be, you know, hard to find, I think, anybody against the expansion of public water. I know sewers is a different story. They're lumped together, which Yeah. Which break them up. Yeah. Maybe that's the problem here. Exactly.

Yeah. I don't see any reason in totto the there's about twothirds I believe of orange which is on public water but we all have septic correct to the extent well correct that north so you want to say something like uh in uh encourage the capacity or the consider augmenting the capacity of orange's public water uh and then period maintain consider expanding maintain the capacity in the sewer system. Yeah. The the comment was explore explore ways to extend Orange's public water as the first one and then the second one could be stay the same as maintain the cap capacity of Orange's sewer systems. Yeah. Yeah. That's fine too.

Yeah. Okay. Good. Okay. I kind of I kind of like the idea of Paul not having water though. Remember this prisoner of Second Avenue. Where's my water? got no water. Just saying. Okay. The last comment is just um there is an issue with the the seal that we used was the the wrong seal on page uh one of the appendix. So, we'll fix that. Um but the rest of the correct seal is used throughout the rest of the plan. So, we can fix it. Yeah. Uh the right seal is the one on the cover. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, that that's the right seal. Yeah, it's on the first page of appendix. First page of the appendix. We got it wrong.

It's this. Yes. The no ribbons or the no no ribbons are supposed to be in there. Oh dear. All right. Yes. It was good catch, I guess. All right. Very good.

The last um the last item is just uh from the SCROG their comments and like Frank said, these are um suggestions or recommendations that you can evaluate whether or not you'd like to incorporate them. Um so the first one was sent in. So, they sent a document that had a the referral. Um, they also sent over uh something that was in the body of the email. And I can just read it to you so you have the exact wording. Um, so they said, "Attached is the resolution from last week's RPC meeting. One thing to note that wasn't in the resolution, but was brought to our attention was the use of the word character when referring to community character." Um, and then they quote public doct 2129. um that essentially says when you mention community character um or when when you mention the word character, you should change the language to physical site characteristics. Um and so the places that we mention that are in 3.1.3 um we say

character. Yeah. So the context on page 20. Yeah. we say um maintain or Orange's character as a rural hamlet. So if you went with this, it would just be um physical characteristics as a rural came. I I don't care what the word police like. Does it? Well, I I think that the language they're suggesting is a little more meaningful. Yeah, it's more specific. Um and then it also is supposed to apply more to land use is why they say that. Yeah. Um so if that's all right with you, we'll we can change that. It's all right with me. It's up to you all. It's all right with me.

Okay. So, we'll change character to physical characteristics. Um Okay. Then the one other comment, um they said everything looks good. Um that it's a realistic look at the future. The one comment that I think Frank had some thoughts on is um they say for any additions to the plan, staff recommends that the town look to redesate the previously removed to district around the Route 1 corridor and consider utilizing the Connecticut Municipal Development Authority for in infrastructure and housing improvements around the key commercial and development corridor. By the way, what just a little background on this that there's a new agency out there. It was just formed last year. Um,

they need something to do. You need something to do. It's called the uh See if I get this right. The Connecticut Municipal Development Agency, CMDA, right? I think they were referring to it as Murdo, right?

Oh. Oh, it was first, by the way, then they changed that because they didn't like how Yeah. The first name was the Municipal Redevelopment Agency. By the way, someone in our office said that very thing. Aren't they going to change this name? It sounds like murder. And uh they did. It's run by a young man. Uh he's very good, David Chorus. Um uh and what they're doing, they have 61, they have a pot of money, $61 million this year from the state. And just this just background, I'm not advocating this. Um, and what it's about is it's supposed to be about a a tod. It's supposed to be about helping towns who have a bus, you know, a bus station or a rail station uh to develop, if they wish, housing. And and what David's group will do is provide to that town if the town agrees, only if the town is interested. um you know um staff and consultants and and grants for that study. Um

do we have any it's and my sense is you don't really this is an industrial area. The best I can see down there is it's a commercial and industrial area and when there was going to be a train station. Yes. Yeah. It made sense, right? at least an argument for a residential component because there was going to be people at the rail, right? Yeah. Yeah. And now there's not. So I I this is a comics is delivering people. Yeah. I think this agency and David's efforts may be good, but I'm not sure they apply here. Yeah, I would say. Okay. Yeah, we don't have a to district anymore.

Yeah. Maybe maybe a project, you know, we don't even have enough bus routes. We have bus. Yeah. Do do we have any further comment then on the uh pending draft PC for 2025 from the public as well? And that was that was going to be my next question. Public anything. Okay. All right. Then I I I would suggest that uh we close the public hearing

and then uh look to uh approve the plan at our next meeting subject to all these changes being made being made to our satisfaction. Yes. And Frank, you mentioned something about a a resolution that you would draft. we can draft the resolution we sent to Jack and uh that way you would have I always like it when you adopt something you know you have you have it in front of you we we'll provide you the change pages to make sure we got everything right and then you we'll change the date of this to your next meeting and call it adop uh you know we we call it the adopt adopted on right

and it's when you adop I think your next meeting is October 7th looking right Um, that's that's correct. So, what we would do is make the changes, you know, in the next week and get you the change pages, make sure everything's okay, Jack's okay and everything. Once that's okay, because these things cost a little bit of money to print. We would then print it with the new date and so on. And you'd have some extra hard copies for the library, the town clerk, yourselves, and you'd have a resolution. So all you would you would be all set because you've you've done the discussion, you've heard from the public.

So that meeting could literally be a resolution uh you know uh and then motion to adopt. All right. Motion. Sounds good. So then someone prepared to make a motion that we close the public hearing. So moved. Second. Second. It's been seconded. All those in favor? I I Okay. So, uh that's the game plan. Next, we'll look to uh approve the plan. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your for your work on this. Okay. Great. Great. Yeah. Yeah. It went uh very very well. No, I stuck to our our game plan.

I was praying that Leonards would never file an application. So, it's done before. We'll do it again. Yeah. All right. That that wraps up our agenda. We have a motion. Move to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Second. A second. And all those in favor? I I All right. Very good. Thank you very much.