The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a by wuyunyi

VIEWS: 5 PAGES: 19

									                                                                                     PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                       Page 251
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a meeting at the Avon Town
Hall on Tuesday September 14, 2010. Present were Duane Starr, Chairman, Douglas Thompson,
Carol Griffin (arrived at 7:35 pm), Edward Whalen, Linda Keith, David Cappello and Marianne
Clark and Alternate Donald Bonner. Absent was Alternate Elaine Primeau. Also present was
Steven Kushner, Director of Planning and Community Development.

Mr. Starr called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm and welcomed Marianne Clark in her new
position as a regular commission member. Mr. Starr noted that Mrs. Clark was formerly an
alternate member who was recently appointed by the Town Council as a regular member to
replace Henry Frey.

ELECTION OF OFFICER

Mr. Starr nominated Douglas Thompson for the position of Vice-Chairman/Secretary to replace
Henry Frey who resigned from the Commission in July 2010. Mr. Thompson accepted the
nomination. Mr. Whalen motioned to elect Douglas Thompson as Vice Chairman/Secretary.
The motion, seconded by Ms. Keith, received approval from Messrs. Starr, Whalen, and
Cappello and Mesdames Keith and Clark.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Mrs. Clark motioned to approve the minutes of July 20, 2010, as submitted. The motion,
seconded by Mr. Whalen received approval from Mrs. Clark and Messrs. Starr, Whalen, and
Bonner. Ms. Keith and Mr. Cappello abstained, as they had not been present for the July 20
meeting. Mr. Thompson abstained, as he had been present for the July 20 meeting but had
recused himself from several applications.

PUBLIC HEARING

Planning and Zoning Commission acting as Aquifer Protection Agency:

      Revised Zoning Map to identify State-approved Level A Aquifer Protection Area for the
       Aquarion Water Company Nod Road Well Field.

Mr. Kushner explained that since the adoption of the Aquifer Protection Program the State has
required that all water companies that have public drinking water supply wells hire consultants to
map the aquifer associated with each well. Every time the DEP approves a new well location the
Town is required to amend the official Zoning Map to identify the new area. He noted that the
subject of this public hearing is for the most recent well field that was mapped in Simsbury; it
doesn’t serve any homes in Avon but a portion of the aquifer is located in Avon. Mr. Kushner
noted that the area involved includes Hunter’s Run, Woodford Hills, and Hazen Park. He noted
that this is the last aquifer area to be identified. Mr. Kushner explained that there are no
registered uses (i.e., gas stations, dry cleaners, manufacturing) located in any of the identified
aquifer areas in Town.

Mr. Starr noted that most of Route 44 does not fall into an aquifer protection area. Mr. Kushner
concurred.
                                                                                       PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                         Page 252
Mrs. Griffin asked whether weed killers and fertilizers used by golf courses and farms affect the
aquifer. Mr. Kushner noted that he doesn’t know if golf courses and farms are uses that are
required to be registered with the DEP but added that he would find out.

Mr. Starr noted that there are no commercial uses in Avon located within the subject aquifer
area.

Ms. Keith motioned to accept the Nod Road Well Field and the changes to the official Zoning
Map. The motion, seconded by Mrs. Clark, received unanimous approval.

App. #4495 - West Avon LLC, owner, Frank Noe, applicant, request for Special Exception
under Section VI.B.3.a.of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit Class 1 restaurant, 427 West Avon
Road, Parcel 4520427, in an NB Zone.

The public hearing was continued from the July 20 meeting.

Present to represent this application was Frank Noe, owner.

Mr. Noe reported that he received an email from the corporate office indicating that Chock
Full’o Nuts cannot make any claims as to the performance of any store location.

Mr. Starr noted that the Commission was asking about traffic counts not performance.

Mr. Noe commented that the franchise agreement states that no representations about the
licensee’s future or past financial performance can be divulged. He noted that employees are not
authorized to make any such representations. Mr. Noe commented that the individual he spoke
to indicated that traffic counts constitute volume and performance.

Mr. Noe explained that he has done his own analysis. He referenced prior applications for this
site noting that one was for Dunkin Donuts (which was denied) and one for Caffeine’s Café
(which was approved). He noted that Dunkin Donuts is considered a “franchise” while
Caffeine’s Café is considered a “mom and pop” operation. He explained that the subject
application falls somewhere in between. He noted that while Chock Full’o Nuts is, per say, a
franchise it is not a typical franchise. Mr. Noe stated that the only thing he is purchasing from
Chock Full’o Nuts is the right to sell their coffee; there are no royalty fees. He added that he can
do whatever he wishes outside the sale of Chock Full’o Nuts’ coffee; for all intents and purposes
the subject proposal is a “mom and pop” operation with a small amount of name recognition.

Mr. Noe explained that he did his own study of headcounts per peak hours; he noted his
awareness of the Commission’s concern with morning traffic. He reviewed the traffic studies
done for Dunkin Donuts by FA Hesketh & Associates and DSL Consultants. He noted that the
report by DSL Consultants indicates that the traffic pattern in a similar site in Simsbury is 40%
higher than traffic exposure at the subject site. The report states that the average am customer
count in Simsbury is 64. Mr. Noe noted that 60% of 64 is 38 vehicles at the subject site. He
noted that 60% of the traffic counts in Simsbury between 6 am and 8 am equate to 30 vehicles on
average. He noted that he has data from a business with a similar concept located on Route 44
but added that he was given the information in confidence and cannot divulge the name. He
noted that the average traffic count for the unidentified business on Route 44 from 6 am to 7 am
                                                                                      PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                        Page 253
is 19 vehicles; from 7 am to 8 am is 41 vehicles; and from 8 am to 9 am is 45 vehicles. Mr. Noe
commented that he believes the daily traffic count on Route 44 is more than double that of West
Avon Road.

Mr. Noe further reviewed the traffic studies from both Hesketh & Associates and DSL
Consulting and noted that the reports indicate that school related traffic on West Avon Road has
a sharp peak from 7:15 am to 7:30 am. He added that the reports indicate that the traffic was free
flowing except for the 15-minute time frame from 7:15 am to 7:30 am. He noted that he doesn’t
anticipate that the subject proposal would realize the amount of traffic volume generated by
either a Dunkin Donuts or the other large chain located on Route 44. Mr. Noe explained that his
estimation for the current proposal is somewhere between 15 and 20 vehicles, on average, per
hour during the peak hours. He commented that the existing businesses on the site are diverse
with regard to their hours of operation. The bank drive through opens at 7:00 am and the lobby
opens at 8:30 am; the nail salon opens at 8:30 am; the liquor store opens at 10 am; and the pizza
restaurant opens at 10 am. He commented that there is ample parking available and very little
traffic coming in and out during the peak hours, aside from the proposed Chock Full’o Nuts and
the bank drive through. He concluded by asking that the Commission approve his request based
on the data supplied. Mr. Noe stated that he feels very strongly that the plaza can support the
proposed use. He added that the two traffic studies done for Dunkin Donuts concluded that the
plaza could support such a use. He noted that he doesn’t anticipate that the subject use would
generate any where near the amount of traffic that a Dunkin Donuts would.

Mrs. Griffin noted that data was provided for the high school and middle school but pointed out
that there are two other schools in the area (Thompson Brook School and Pine Grove School)
that add traffic and should be included in the calculation.

In response to Mrs. Griffin’s comment, Mr. Noe noted that the study and calculation were done
based on traffic counts and the impact at the subject site from 7:15 am to 7:30 am. He
commented that it doesn’t make a difference whether its schools or other things because the
impact in the study concludes what the traffic count is during that time; it’s the traffic not the
schools. Mrs. Griffin noted that the elementary schools open later than the middle school and
high school and asked whether the traffic count was done after the elementary schools open.
Mr. Noe noted that the individuals conducting the traffic counts were on site all day and the
report concludes that the only impact is during the 15-minute time period from 7:15 am to 7:30
am.

Ms. Keith commented that Route 44 is a different caliber of road than West Avon Road; the
roads are not comparable with regard to traffic flow. She noted that Route 44 is a four-lane
highway; Route 10, running through Simsbury, is a higher caliber road than West Avon Road.
She added that Caffeine’s Café was considered before any other eating establishments existed at
this site. She commented that Caffeine’s Café is a separate entity and should not be compared
with the subject proposal.

Mr. Noe noted that the proposed hours of operation will have no impact on the other existing
businesses. He commented that the existing businesses in his plaza have no impact on morning
traffic.
                                                                                     PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                       Page 254
Mr. Kushner commented that it appears reasonable to assume that the traffic volumes that would
result from the proposed “Chock Full’o Nuts” business are most likely somewhere in between
the detailed traffic report for Dunkin Donuts and the “mom and pop” non-franchise business
“Caffiene’s Café”. He noted that exactly where the proposed business falls is unknown but
Mr. Noe has acknowledged that he doesn’t have experience with this type of business and is
trying to make reasonable assumptions. He noted that no new traffic studies are available and,
therefore, no new information from the Traffic Authority is available.

There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4495 was closed.

App. #4497 - Brighenti, Michael, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section
IV.A.5.of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit a waiver of the density for a first division of land,
38 Pine Hill Road, Parcel 3560038, in an RU2A Zone.

The public hearing was continued from the July 20 meeting.

Present to represent this application were David Whitney, PE, Consulting Engineers, LLC, and
Michael Brighenti.

Mr. Whitney noted that approval has been received from the Farmington Valley Health District;
he added that he has conducted soil and percolation tests on the site.

There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4497 was closed.

App. #4501 - Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section
IV.A.6. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit reduction in minimum landscaped area, 267 &
281 Country Club Road and 10 Sunnybrook Drive, Parcels 1940267, 1940281, and 4170010, in
R30 and R40 Zones. (CONT’D from July 20)

The public hearing was continued from the July 20 meeting.

Also heard at this time but not part of the public hearing:

App. #4502 - Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Site Plan Approval to permit addition
to existing library, 267 & 281 Country Club Road and 10 Sunnybrook Drive, Parcels 1940267,
1940281, and 4170010 in R30 and R40 Zones.

Present to represent this application were Peter Wells, architect, Tuthill & Wells; Doug Ellis,
PE, Buck & Buck, LLC; and Dean Johnson, landscape architect, Johnson Land Design.
Steve Bartha, Assistant to the Town Manager, and Virginia Vocelli, Library Director, were also
present.

Mr. Wells noted his appreciation for suggestions offered by the Commission at the last meeting
and noted that these suggestions have been incorporated into the plan. He explained that a single
entrance from Country Club Road has been maintained but an exit has been added for anyone
just wishing to drive in and access the book drop. Mr. Wells noted that the original existing
book drop will remain in its present location but will be used only by pedestrians. He explained
that the reason that the new book drop was designed in the location that it was is because the
                                                                                      PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                        Page 255
addition has a basement whereas the existing building does not. He further explained that one of
the charges of the building program is to have the library RFID (barcode technology) ready when
there is money available to implement the technology. Mr. Wells noted that there is a way to use
this technology in the new proposed location for the book drop (which doesn’t have a basement).

In response to Mr. Starr’s question, Mr. Wells noted that the book drop will be housed in an
inconspicuous, single-story building 10 feet by 20 feet in size. Mr. Starr confirmed that a
pedestrian walkway will be incorporated along the new building addition. Mr. Wells concurred.
In response to Mr. Starr’s question, Mr. Wells explained that the driveway/path off of
Sunnybrook Drive is a fire code exit only but added that it will be widened with the same stone
that is being used around the building for storm water control.

In response to Mrs. Clark’s question, Mr. Wells explained that there are concrete sidewalks on
both sides of the fire code driveway.

In response to Mrs. Griffin’s questions, Mr. Wells verified that there are existing sidewalks in the
front of the building along Country Club Road. Mr. Wells noted fencing is proposed around the
dumpster pad. He explained that Town Staff has requested a masonry structure around the
dumpster which has been agreed to.

In response to Mr. Bonner’s concern, Mr. Wells confirmed that the emergency access/exit will
be plowed and maintained.

In response to Mr. Starr’s comment, Mr. Wells noted that he is in agreement with all the
proposed approval conditions.

Mr. Cappello commented that the second exit that has been added is a lot to just drop off a book
and noted that he is not in favor of it.

Ms. Keith commented that a second exit is beneficial when the library is having an event and
there is too much traffic.

Mr. Starr asked whether the trees that would come down to locate the new book drop will be
relocated. Mr. Johnson explained that approximately 3 or 4 trees will have to come down as they
are located in the right-of-way area where the road will be located, but there will still be a good
cluster of trees that remain.

Mr. Kushner noted that the Town is asking for a reduction in landscaped area; per the
Regulations, 65% of the site must be green and 35% can be covered with impervious surfaces.
He explained that there is an opportunity to request a 10% reduction to end up with a 55%
landscape condition. He commented that the addition of the driveway for the book drop has
added a small amount of additional impervious surface but noted that the plans now show
landscaping at 55.2%. Mr. Kushner explained that the maximum landscape reduction is now
being requested but a significant number of plants are being added and the building program is
high quality. He pointed out that the Director of Public Works would like to work with the
design team to move the proposed evergreens farther away from the parking area to allow more
area for snow plowing.
                                                                                     PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                       Page 256
Diane Carney, 36 Rosewood Road, noted that she is a member of the building committee and
extended her appreciation to the Commission for their input in connection with the driveways.

There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4501 was closed.

App. #4503 - Farmington Bank, owner, Sign Pro, Inc., applicant, request for Special Exception
under Section VII.C.4.b.(2) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit low-profile detached
identification sign, 310 West Main Street, Parcel 4540310, in a CR Zone.

Present to represent this application was Kyle Niles, Sign Pro, Inc.

In response to Mr. Kushner’s question, Mr. Niles noted that the new sign is proposed to be low-
intensity, internally illuminated with LED; he noted that the existing sign on the site is
temporary. In response to Mr. Starr’s question, Mr. Niles confirmed that the white part of the
sign is what will be illuminated.

In response to Ms. Keith’s concern regarding sign color, Mr. Kushner explained that although
the subject site is part of a consolidated parcel agreement there is no sign theme involved
because it is a single, stand alone property.

There being no further input the public hearing for App. #4503 was closed.

App. #4504 - E. Martin and Marie Cornelio, owners, E. Martin Cornelio, applicant, request for
Special Exception under Section III.G.4.f. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit regrading
below the 100-year floodplain, 2 Wills Walk, Parcel 5960002, in an R40 Zone.

Present to represent this application were David Whitney, PE, Consulting Engineers, LLC, and
Martin Cornelio, owner.

Mr. Starr commented that this application must also be approved by FEMA. Mr. Whitney
concurred and explained that Sconsett Point was approved in 2000; the original 100-year flood
line winds through the property and is part of the development. He noted that all the buildings
were constructed such that all the first floors are above the 500-year flood elevation and all the
basements are above the 100-year flood elevation. Mr. Whitney explained that in 2008, FEMA
issued new flood maps which contain some inaccuracies/errors. He noted that the basement at
the subject address is located above the 100-year flood elevation but a portion of the ground near
the foundation is below the 100-year flood elevation and therefore doesn’t meet FEMA’s
requirements. He explained that the request is to move a small amount of material (2-3 cubic
yards) from the backyard to a small area next to the foundation to raise the lowest ground
elevation by a few inches. Mr. Whitney noted that an approval of this application would allow a
correction to the current FEMA map, which is incorrect, and remove this property from the
FEMA flood zone. Mr. Whitney added that problems with the revised FEMA maps are
nationwide.

There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4504 was closed.
                                                                                       PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                         Page 257
App. #4505 - Margaret Connoy, owner, Roy Connoy, applicant, request for Special Exception
under Section IV.A.4.s. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit a professional office in the home,
95 Secret Lake Road, Parcel 3890095, in an R15 Zone.

Present to represent this application was Roy Connoy, applicant.

Mr. Connoy commented that he would like to move his home-based dental lab business to a new
house he is constructing at 95 Secret Lake Road. Mr. Connoy added that there haven’t been any
problems in the 12 years he’s been running the business at 97 Secret Lake Road.

In response to Mrs. Griffin’s concern, Mr. Kushner noted that the approval for a home based
business at 95 Secret Lake is specifically for a dental lab.

Mr. Kushner noted that the house at 95 Secret Lake is located very close to the house at
97 Secret Lake (12 feet from the boundary) and asked Mr. Connoy whether there is any noise
generated from this type of business that could bother a neighbor. Mr. Connoy noted that he
doesn’t believe there would ever be a problem, as there has never been a problem in the past
12 years. He added that no one will know he is there.

In response to Mrs. Clark’s question, Mr. Connoy noted that his hours are 7 am to 7 pm.

There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4505 was closed.

App. #4507 - 302 West Main Street LLC, owner, Stephen Fish, applicant, request for Special
Exception under Section VII.C.4.b.(1) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit detached
identification sign, 302 West Main Street, Parcel 4540302, in a CR Zone.

Present to represent this application were Stephen Fish, owner and applicant, and
Bruce Cagenello, realtor.

Mr. Fish explained that he has owned the building at 302 West Main for many years and added
that there has always been a problem identifying where it is located. He noted that a new tenant
that will be moving into the building has asked for an identification sign for safety reasons.
Mr. Fish noted the request is for a sign on Route 44 to alert people that the building is located to
the rear. He noted that the proposed sign location was staked in the driveway located between
Tri-Town Plaza and Farmington Bank but the Police Chief has indicated that a sign in that
location would negatively affect the sightline and does not approve. Mr. Fish noted that the
Farmington Bank is agreeable to having a sign for 302 West Main located on their (Farmington
Bank) property. Mr. Fish explained that he is looking for suggestions from the Town and/or the
Commission. He noted that Mr. Kushner suggested that possibly “302” could be placed atop an
existing sign on Route 44 with the possibility of some directional signs once inside the property.

Mr. Starr asked whether the Police Chief would still object, if the sign were 3 feet high rather
than 4 feet high. Mr. Cagenello noted that he has spoken to the Police Chief who has indicated
that he would not have a problem with a sign if it were lower (so cars could see over it) but he
would want to look at it before he would approve it.
                                                                                       PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                         Page 258
Mr. Kushner offered background information and noted that several properties on West Main
Street, namely Coldwell Banker (300); the Farmington Bank (310); Tri-Town Plaza (320); and
the Clipper Center (290), entered into a Consolidated Parcel Agreement in the mid 1980’s. He
explained that if a Consolidated Parcel Agreement (CPA) exists, the Zoning Regulations only
permit one detached sign per CPA. He further explained that many of the existing detached
signs were already in place when the CPA was entered into. Mr. Kushner noted that there is
really no opportunity under the current Regulations to permit another detached sign unless some
kind of waiver were to be granted. He commented that making the sign proposed for the
driveway/ island smaller could address the Police Chief’s concerns but added that it is his
opinion that a better solution would be to add some identification for 302 West Main to the top
of the Farmington Bank detached sign. Additional directional signage could possibly be added
internal to the site as confirmation to motorists once they have turned off of Route 44 that they
are in the right place.

Mr. Fish and Mr. Cagenello noted that a sign is really needed for safety reasons.

Mr. Starr noted that he would not have a problem with either a collaborative effort with
Farmington Bank or a smaller sign in the driveway/island but suggested that the public hearing
be continued to the next meeting to allow time to consider the alternatives.

Mr. Cappello commented that a lower-profile sign in the driveway/island may be a problem as
the island is not very big and the sign, if it’s close to the ground, would take a beating in the
winter time with snow plowing. Mr. Cappello suggested that there appears to be more room on
the Coldwell Banker side. Mr. Kushner concurred and noted that there are 3 possibilities:
1) Farmington Bank; 2) Coldwell Banker; and 3) Tri-Town Plaza.

Mr. Fish noted that he thinks it’s a good suggestion to have directional signs once it is identified
where to turn off of West Main Street.

Mr. Starr noted his agreement about the snow removal issue in the driveway/island and added
that he feels that adding an address number on an existing sign (Farmington Bank, Coldwell
Banker, or Tri-Town) is a better idea.

In response to Mr. Cagenello’s question, Mr. Kushner explained that if a second number were
added to the top of the Farmington Bank sign it would not take away from the allowable sign
area under the Regulations; the address number is not counted as part of the square footage.
Mr. Cagenello commented that he has spoken to Coldwell Banker and they have indicated that
because they may not be staying in that building they are not sure if they want to add anything to
their sign. He noted that The Clipper Center (290) has indicated that they would have no
problem adding a number to their sign. In response to Mr. Cagenello’s question, Mr. Kushner
explained that the Commission would not need to be involved if permission could be obtained
from the appropriate property owners. Mr. Kushner commented that it may be possible to have
the address for “302” on 2 different signs, as the building has access from 2 different driveways.
Mr. Fish noted that that would be helpful.

Mrs. Griffin motioned to continue the public hearing for App. #4507 to the next meeting,
scheduled for October 12. The motion, seconded by Mrs. Clark, received unanimous approval.
                                                                                      PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                        Page 259
App. #4508 - David Ford, owner, Jack Kemper, applicant, request for Special Exception under
Section IX.E. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit sports court in 150-foot ridgeline setback,
44 Sky View Drive, Parcel 6060044, in an RU2A Zone.

Mr. Starr noted that the applicant has requested a continuance to the next meeting.

Mr. Thompson motioned to continue the public hearing for App. #4508 to the next meeting,
scheduled for October 12. The motion, seconded by Mrs. Clark, received unanimous approval.

App. #4509 - Donald Jakubiak, owner, Weatherstone LLC, applicant, request for Special
Exception under Section III.H. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit earth removal, 47 Lofgren
Road, Parcel 3030047, in an R40 Zone.

Present to represent this application were Anthony Francoline, Avonridge, Inc., representing
Weatherstone, LLC, and Jeffrey Sard representing Weatherstone, LLC.

Mr. Francoline explained that the Weatherstone Subdivision is a three-phase, 60-lot subdivision.
He noted that Phase I is 2 lots on Sheffield Lane and Phase II is 30 lots with the extension of
Northington Drive. He commented that excavation for the roadways and utilities have created an
excess of rock which was crushed; 5K to 6K yards was used as road base but there is
approximately 10K yards of excess/surplus material. He explained that soil tests indicate that
there is a surplus of rock in Phase III that will generate enough material for the roads in Phase
III. Mr. Francoline noted that the request is to sell the surplus material to someone in Town to
cut down on trucking. He added that there has been a request from Peachtree Village on Arch
Road to purchase approximately 3K yards of this material.

Mr. Starr commented that anything trucked into Peachtree Village must be routed from Route 44
onto Darling Drive, as there is a restriction that Arch Road cannot be used for any construction
traffic. He asked about the traffic patterns into the Weatherstone Subdivision.

In response to Mr. Starr’s questions, Mr. Francoline noted that the traffic alternates between
Northgate and Bridgewater. He commented that the estimate is approximately 200 truck loads
over a 4 to 5 week period. Mr. Francoline explained that the Regulations permit up to 1,000
yards of material to be moved without a permit so some of the material has already been moved.
He noted that 10 truck loads using 2 trucks equates to approximately 20 trips in an 8-hour day.

In response to Mr. Cappello’s question, Mr. Francoline commented that Peachtree Village needs
the material for the sub base for the parking lot.

Ms. Keith commented that she would prefer that the trucks not operate while the school buses
are picking up and dropping off students.

Mr. Kushner noted that the Police Chief has indicated that because the overall number of trucks
is low, he was not overly concerned about the school bus issue. Mr. Kushner, however,
suggested that if an approval is granted that a condition be added that a time schedule and the
routing of trucks be approved by the Police Chief.

In response to Mr. Kushner’s question, Mr. Sard explained that hauling began last Friday.
                                                                                        PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                          Page 260
Mr. Kushner recommended that a schedule be prepared and submitted to the Chief of Police for
review and approval.

Mr. Starr suggested that the trucks head north on Lovely Street to Route 44 to Darling Drive.

There being no further input, the public hearing for App. #4509 was closed, as well as the entire
public hearing.

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING

Mrs. Griffin motioned to waive Administrative Procedure #6 and consider Apps. #4495, #4497,
#4501, #4502, #4503, #4504, #4505, and #4509. Mrs. Clark seconded the motion that received
unanimous approval.

App. #4495 - West Avon LLC, owner, Frank Noe, applicant, request for Special Exception
under Section VI.B.3.a.of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit Class 1 restaurant, 427 West Avon
Road, Parcel 4520427, in an NB Zone.

Mr. Whalen motioned for approval of App. #4495; Mr. Thompson seconded the motion.

Mr. Thompson asked what period of time the approval should be for. Mr. Starr commented that
a 2-year time period has been discussed at prior meetings. He noted that a condition could add
some criteria to be reviewed at the end of the 2-year time period. He commented that the
applicant has projected a peak of 30 cars an hour during the morning time period from 6 am to
8 am. He noted that this would equate to approximately 1 car every two minutes, which seems
reasonable. Mr. Starr noted that if the applicant were to submit a traffic report at the end of a
2-year period that indicates that for a two-week period not more than 40 cars per hour were
realized he would feel comfortable with that but added that it needs to be made clear that this is
not an approval for a Dunkin Donuts or any type of national brand. He stressed that this
restaurant must be a neighborhood business operation not high-traffic volume.

Mrs. Griffin commented that she feels uncomfortable with any restaurant at this location that
would generate its peak traffic volume at the same time that the school traffic is in operation.

Mr. Starr noted that Luke’s Donuts has been operating a similar type of business for many years
right down the road. Mrs. Griffin agreed but added that Luke’s was in existence long before the
subject site existed. She noted her concerns with anyone making a left turn out of the driveway
at the subject site.

Mr. Thompson commented that he believes the traffic will be self-regulated within a two-week
period.

Mrs. Griffin noted that she feels that two years is too long for the initial approval in the event
that problems arise.

Mr. Whalen questioned how the Commission can discuss this application in the same context
with having approved “Caffeine’s Café” for the same location. Mr. Whalen noted that he
frequents Caffeine’s Café (in a different location) all the time and it is very similar. He
                                                                                        PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                          Page 261
acknowledged the difference between the subject application and a Dunkin Donuts but added
that he fails to see the difference between the subject proposal and Caffeine’s Café.

Mrs. Griffin commented that while the Commission knew what Dunkin Donuts and Caffeine’s
Café were all about they don’t know exactly what this application is for.

Mr. Whalen noted that the Commission knew what Caffeine’s Café was and asked what the
difference is. Ms. Keith commented that Caffeine’s Café doesn’t have the volume. Mr. Whalen
commented that the Commission doesn’t know that and added that Caffeine’s Café has been
around for a long time in two different locations. He added that, in his opinion, based on the
number of seats and the number of possible incoming vehicles, the gas station next door has the
potential for far more traffic than the subject restaurant proposal. Mr. Whalen commented that
the pizza restaurant opens at 10 am and added that he doesn’t understand what the conflict could
be if the Commission approved Caffeine’s Café.

Mrs. Clark suggested that the approval could be for 1 year.

Mr. Starr commented that one year really isn’t a reasonable time limit, as equipment needs to be
installed. He acknowledged his understanding and agreement with Mr. Whalen’s earlier
comments and added that he doesn’t have a problem with the current proposal in the form that it
is being presented but noted that he doesn’t want the business to transform into something of a
higher volume.

Mr. Whalen noted that he voted against Dunkin Donuts and understands why it could have been
a problem but added that he doesn’t see how the subject proposal would be a problem.

Mr. Cappello commented that there is no traffic study for the current proposal and there is school
traffic; bicycle and pedestrian traffic; only one way in and out of the site; and the gas station next
door. He commented that it is asking a lot of the nearby intersection that already backs up
enough as it is. He noted that he would be more comfortable with a 1-year time limit.

Mr. Thompson commented that if 2 years is too long, a 1-year time limit should be considered.

Ms. Keith commented that she has a problem with the application.

Mr. Whalen amended his earlier motion to approve App. #4495 for a two-year time period with
that time period to begin after a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Mr. Thompson seconded
the amended motion that received approval from Messrs. Whalen, Thompson, and Starr. Voting
in opposition were Mesdames Griffin, Keith, and Clark, and Mr. Cappello.

Mrs. Clark motioned for approval of App. #4495 with the following condition:

1. Approval for “Chock Full’O Nuts” Class I restaurant is granted for a one-year time period
   beginning with the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

The motion, seconded by Mr. Thompson, received approval from Mesdames Clark, Griffin, and
Keith and Messrs. Thompson, Whalen, and Starr. Mr. Cappello voted in opposition to approve
App. #4495.
                                                                                       PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                         Page 262
Mr. Kushner noted, for the record, that in order for the applicant to reapply for a permanent use
after one year from the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant should be advised
to hire a traffic expert to measure traffic counts to show compliance with the standard of not
exceeding 40 cars for the first 2 hours between 6 am and 8 am.

Mrs. Griffin commented that if there are no problems, there would most likely not be any
objection from the Commission for a longer period the next time. However, she noted that
because this proposal is so questionable, her first inclination was to vote against the application
altogether. She added that the proposed business is an unknown and it is possible that it could
work.

Ms. Keith commented that it must be understood by the applicant that if he wishes to change this
business to a Dunkin Donuts that a reapplication is required.

Mr. Kushner explained that the approval is specific to the information presented by the applicant;
it is specific only to a Chock Full’O Nuts franchise.

App. #4497 - Brighenti, Michael, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section
IV.A.5.of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit a waiver of the density for a first division of land,
38 Pine Hill Road, Parcel 3560038, in an RU2A Zone.

Mr. Cappello motioned to approve App. #4497. The motion, seconded by Mr. Thompson,
received unanimous approval.

App. #4501 - Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section
IV.A.6. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit reduction in minimum landscaped area, 267 &
281 Country Club Road and 10 Sunnybrook Drive, Parcels 1940267, 1940281, and 4170010, in
R30 and R40 Zones.

App. #4502 - Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Site Plan Approval to permit addition
to existing library, 267 & 281 Country Club Road and 10 Sunnybrook Drive, Parcels 1940267,
1940281, and 4170010 in R30 and R40 Zones.

Ms. Keith motioned to approve Apps. #4501 and #4502 subject to the following conditions:

1.     Compliance with the Fire Marshal’s report dated September 10, 2010.

2.     Preparation of a traffic control plan subject to review and approval by the Traffic
       Authority and Town Engineer.

3.     The double row of Canadian hemlock and white fur, as shown on the Site Planting Plan
       LP1, shall be adjusted to provide adequate room for snow removal operations, as directed
       by the Director of Public Works.

4.     A trash enclosure similar to the detail used for the Marriott Residence Inn shall be
       utilized, subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning.
                                                                                      PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                        Page 263
5.     The portion of the brick pavers shown on the courtyard space along the rear elevation
       shall be modified to allow easier winter maintenance. A revised detail could include a
       concrete pad with a layer of stone dust and concrete pavers. This area shall generally be
       limited to that space needed to provide pedestrian access from the rear elevation of the
       library extending to the adjacent sidewalk.

6.     Any proposed substitutions to site lighting may be approved by Town Staff provided the
       substitute light fixtures have similar lighting characteristics to those shown on the
       proposed drawings and such that light levels are zero along the entire property line.
       Should substitutions be proposed, a revised site lighting plan (SO1) shall be prepared.

Mrs. Clark seconded the motion that received approval from Mesdames Keith, Clark, and Griffin
and Messrs. Starr, Thompson, and Whalen. Mr. Cappello voted in opposition and added that he
feels there should be less impervious surface.

App. #4503 - Farmington Bank, owner, Sign Pro, Inc., applicant, request for Special Exception
under Section VII.C.4.b.(2) of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit low-profile detached
identification sign, 310 West Main Street, Parcel 4540310, in a CR Zone.

Ms. Keith motioned to approve App. #4503 subject to the following condition:

1.     This detached sign is approved with the option to add the address number for
       302 West Main Street to the top of the sign for directional purposes.

The motion, seconded by Mrs. Griffin, received unanimous approval.

App. #4504 - E. Martin and Marie Cornelio, owners, E. Martin Cornelio, applicant, request for
Special Exception under Section III.G.4.f. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit regrading
below the 100-year floodplain, 2 Wills Walk, Parcel 5960002, in an R40 Zone.

Mr. Thompson motioned to approve App. #4504. The motion, seconded by Mrs. Griffin,
received unanimous approval.

App. #4505 - Margaret Connoy, owner, Roy Connoy, applicant, request for Special Exception
under Section IV.A.4.s. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit a professional office in the home,
95 Secret Lake Road, Parcel 3890095, in an R15 Zone.

Mr. Thompson motioned to approve App. #4505 subject to the following conditions:

1.     No odors or noise shall be detectable at the property line.

2.     No more than one (1) employee shall be permitted.

The motion, seconded by Mr. Cappello, received unanimous approval.

App. #4509 - Donald Jakubiak, owner, Weatherstone LLC, applicant, request for Special
Exception under Section III.H. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit earth removal, 47 Lofgren
Road, Parcel 3030047, in an R40 Zone.
                                                                                    PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                      Page 264
Ms. Keith motioned to approve App. #4509 subject to the following condition:

1.     A time schedule including truck routes shall be prepared and submitted to the Chief of
       Police for review and approval.

The motion, seconded by Mrs. Clark received approval from Mesdames Keith, Clark, and Griffin
and Messrs. Starr, Thompson, and Cappello. Mr. Whalen voted in opposition.

NEW APPLICATION

App. #4506 - Avon Marketplace Investors, LLC, owner, Poyant Signs, applicant, request for
Site Plan Modification to add awnings, Avon Marketplace, 380 West Main Street, Parcel
4540380, in a CR Zone.

Present to represent this application was Michael Patenaude, Poyant Signs, Inc.

Mr. Patenaude noted that he represents Eastern Mountain Sports (EMS) who is requesting to
install awnings similar to what exists for “Ulta” at Avon Marketplace.

In response to Mrs. Griffin’s question, Mr. Patenaude explained that each tenant uses their own
colors; the colors for EMS are blue and white. He noted that the proposed blue color for the
EMS awning is pretty close to what is shown in the awning drawing. Mr. Patenaude noted that
the lettering size on the awning will be 6 inches to be consistent with what exists on the Ulta
awnings.

In response to Mr. Cappello’s question, Mr. Patenaude noted that the awning projects out slightly
from the building.

Mrs. Clark motioned to approve App. #4506. The motion, seconded by Mr. Cappello, received
unanimous approval.

OTHER BUSINESS

2011-2012 Meeting Schedule

Mr. Starr noted that November 8, 2011, is an election day and, therefore, the proposed schedule
must be amended. Mr. Kushner noted that the schedule would be revised and presented at the
next meeting.

Request for 2nd 90-day extension to file mylars - 121 West Avon Road - Central CT Health
Alliance

Mr. Thompson motioned to approve the request for a 2nd 90-day extension to file mylars in
connection with a 2-lot subdivision at 121 West Avon Road (Apps. #4462-63). The motion,
seconded by Mrs. Clark, received unanimous approval.
                                                                                       PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                         Page 265
Appraisal for 121 West Avon Road - Central CT Health Alliance

Mr. Starr commented that the appraisal totals $150K per lot, or a total of $300K. He noted that
several adjustments were applied which reduces the total appraisal to $205K. Mr. Starr noted
that he doesn’t feel that it is right to apply the adjustments.

Mr. Kushner reported that he has spoken with the Tax Assessor who indicates that he (the
Assessor) does not have a problem with the methodology used for computing the appraisal.
Mr. Kushner explained that it is his understanding that the main reason for the adjusted appraisal
is due to the fact that there are not many comparable sales to view where land is actually
purchased in the way that the State Statute dictates. He further explained that the State Statutes
indicate that the determination of land value is to be based on its pre-approved condition and not
the post-approved value, which is approximately $150K per lot in this instance. He added that
the Assessor has indicated that in an ideal scenario there would be several sales where property
was sold in the pre-approved condition whereas, in reality, most sales are in the post-approved
condition. Mr. Kushner reiterated that the Tax Assessor is comfortable with the methodology
used for this appraisal.

Mrs. Griffin asked whether the pre-approved condition is one huge lot with an existing building.
Mr. Kushner noted that the building had been torn down before an application was submitted to
the Commission.

Don Stern, representing Central CT Health Alliance, commented that he met with Mr. Kushner
at the very beginning of the process. Mr. Stern noted that Mr. Kushner was pretty adamant that
the applicant would not get a second lot. He commented that there were also a number of other
parties interested in the property that were told by Mr. Kushner that it was very unlikely that a
second lot would be approved. Mr. Stern reiterated that during the early stages of this process
there was an indication that it was very unlikely that an approval would be granted. He noted
that once the Commission granted an approval the value of the property went up but that is not
what the term “in the raw” means and what the Statute tells the appraiser to look at.

Mr. Kushner noted his disagreement with some of Mr. Stern’s representations and explained that
he told interested parties that there would be some difficulty in obtaining an approval for two lots
but added that he doesn’t believe he ever indicated that the probability of an approval would be
very low. He noted that a developer would have to look at the land and realize that there is risk
involved.

Mr. Thompson commented that there is more risk before than after. Mr. Kushner concurred and
added that one of the issues with the subject parcel is that there really wasn’t enough land area to
get two lots unless the Commission agreed to count the land under the road.

Mr. Starr noted that the lots used for comparison purposes are approved lots. Mr. Kushner
concurred and noted that the Assessor made the same point.

Ms. Keith asked whether the Commission will now see appraisals coming through with discounts
applied. Mr. Kushner explained that the Assessor has indicated that if the comparables being
used for an appraisal are from the sale of lots following an approval by the Commission, then it
is appropriate to apply a discount. Mr. Kushner added that the Commission’s actions
                                                                                        PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                          Page 266
significantly inflate the value of land. He added that it is his understanding that if information
about the sale of raw land is available, discounts would really not be necessary.

Mr. Thompson motioned to approve the $205,000 appraisal for 121 West Avon Road. The
motion, seconded by Mrs. Clark, received unanimous approval.

Request for 90-day extension to file mylars - 70 Talcott Notch Road - Markow/Secor

Mrs. Griffin motioned to approve the request for a 90-day extension to file mylars in connection
with a 2-lot subdivision at 70 Talcott Notch Road (PZC App. #4218). The motion, seconded by
Mrs. Clark, received unanimous approval.

STAFF REPORT

Time limits for temporary cul-de-sacs

Mr. Kushner noted that he had a discussion with Town Attorney Michael Zizka regarding
temporary cul-de-sacs. He explained that he reported to Attorney Zizka that there have been a
number of precedents over the last 50 years where the Commission has approved temporary cul-
de-sacs and then permitted successive developers to add onto these cul-de-sacs in the
anticipation that some future connection would eventually make the road a through road. He
noted that a through road, once realized, would be consistent with the Transportation Plan
contained in the Plan of Conservation and Development. Mr. Kushner commented that
Northington Drive is a good example, as it was constructed incrementally over a 15-year time
period. Mr. Kushner explained that he discussed with Attorney Zizka the recent approval for
8 additional lots at the end of Haynes Road (PZC Apps. #4486-87-90). He noted that the road
that will be constructed as part of this approval does not fulfill any goal the Commission has to
build an eventual through road to make a connection to Haynes Road. Mr. Kushner explained
that the construction of this road will make a non-conforming condition worse by adding 8 lots.
He noted that he asked Attorney Zizka if it would be legally possible to place restrictions in this
type of scenario. He commented that if such a restriction were possible it may be the case that a
property owned who has the potential for 8 lots may have to wait until an eventual connection to
the north is made and the temporary cul-de-sac situation is resolved. Mr. Kushner stated that
Attorney Zizka has indicated that the answer to this question is complicated and offered
information about a court case he was involved with in the Town of Hebron for a proposed road
connection that crossed over into an adjacent town.

Mr. Starr commented that Avon experienced a similar situation when a subdivision named
“Williamsburg” was constructed on the Avon/Unionville town line. He noted that the entire
development is located in Farmington but the road entrance is located in Avon. He added the
development did not meet Avon’s criteria for the number of houses constructed.

Mr. Thompson noted that there is a development located across the street from his house that has
an entrance located in Farmington but all the houses are located in Avon.

Ms. Keith shared her opinion such that if a temporary cul-de-sac exists and a developer wants to
add homes to that cul-de-sac, that developer must make arrangements for the road to be extended
through or no approval for additional houses would be granted. She noted that the cul-de-sac
                                                                                      PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                        Page 267
would no longer be temporary and a through road would exist. She commented that this is
something that the Commission needs to decide.

Mr. Kushner concurred with Ms. Keith and added that there are really two pieces involved; spur
roads that come off of existing roads and the fulfillment of the Transportation Plan, which is the
extension of cul-de-sacs to accomplish the goal of through roads. He noted that Attorney Zizka
has indicated that it may be possible to write a regulation to address the spur roads. Mr. Kushner
commented that any such regulation should allow for the construction of at least one house on a
parcel.

Mrs. Griffin commented that everyone has the right to build at least one house on property they
own. Mr. Kushner concurred. Mrs. Griffin added that no one has the right to split up a tract of
land into as many pieces as they want just for profit.

Mr. Kushner noted that he could draft a regulation and review it with Attorney Zizka.

Ms. Keith commented that a regulation should include the requirement that the next development
off of a temporary cul-de-sac must involve completion of the road.

Mr. Thompson noted that it is important not to restrict the eventual flow of traffic throughout the
Town. He pointed out that if this procedure were implemented back in 1957, there would still
only be 2 major roads in Town with numerous cul-de-sacs emptying out onto these 2 roads with
no ability for traffic transfer.

Mr. Starr asked whether a new regulation, if created, could affect the existing temporary cul-de-
sacs in Town or would such a regulation only involve future temporary cul-de-sacs.

Mr. Kushner commented that if such a regulation were written it isn’t likely to be a major issue
going forward, given the network that has already been created in Town.

Mr. Starr suggested that it would be a good idea to research how many existing temporary cul-
de-sacs still have the potential for development around them. Mr. Kushner concurred and noted
that he would research it.

NON-PRINTED AGENDA ITEM

Wood burning Furnaces

Mr. Kushner explained that the Town received an email from a resident interested in West
Hartford’s proposal to ban wood burning furnaces. He noted that, currently, wood burning
furnaces are regulated by the State Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). He
commented that strict regulations are in place but even with compliance of those regulations
there are concerns that conditions could be created in a Town like Avon that residents find
objectionable. He explained that these furnaces can produce a lot of smoke and odor; there are
environmental concerns, as these furnaces produce particulate matter and pump out a lot of
pollutants. Mr. Kushner explained that the DEP’s regulations require that furnaces be placed at
least 200 feet from a neighboring house and the stack be positioned approximately 10 feet above
                                                                                       PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                         Page 268
the house peak. He noted that both the Building Official and the Fire Marshal have indicated
that, to date, there have been no inquiries about permits to build this type of furnace in Avon.
Mr. Kushner reviewed the following three options:

1. The Town could do nothing and enforce the regulations adopted by the State DEP in 2005,
   which is what most of the towns in Connecticut are doing, or;

2. Adopt changes to the Zoning Regulations which would place further limitations to the State’s
   regulations on the citing of these furnaces. For example, the Town could require a minimum
   lot size of 10 acres or set a requirement that these furnaces must be located 500 to 1000 feet
   from a nearby residence, or:

3. Adopt an approach similar to West Hartford and ban them. Mr. Kushner noted that
   Farmington’s Town Attorney advised Farmington’s Town Planner that it would be better to
   utilize a Town Ordinance rather than the Zoning Regulations for this purpose.

Mr. Starr noted that if the Zoning Regulations are used the Town has to take the offender to court
but if an ordinance is used the Town has the ability to impose a fine.

Mr. Kushner noted that the Town Council will be discussing this issue at their next meeting.

Mr. Starr commented that this information only pertains to exterior/outdoor wood burning
furnaces and does not include indoor wood burning furnaces. Mr. Kushner concurred.
Mr. Starr commented that his preference is that no changes be made to the Zoning Regulations
and suggested that if the Town wishes to ban outdoor wood burning furnaces that an ordinance
be created.

Mrs. Griffin commented that she would like to see outdoor wood burning furnaces banned as an
ordinance because they could create problems for people with existing breathing problems.

In response to Mr. Kushner’s question, Mr. Starr clarified that his suggestion is that either
outdoor wood burning furnaces be banned by the Zoning Regulations or the Commission should
recommend to the Town Council that they be banned by ordinance. Mr. Starr commented that
ordinances are easier to enforce than the Zoning Regulations. Mrs. Griffin reiterated that she
would prefer the adoption of an ordinance to ban the furnaces. Mr. Thompson commented that
he doesn’t think there would ever be that many but added that one furnace could be just as bad as
a dozen. Mr. Kushner agreed.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,


Linda Sadlon, Clerk
                                                                                                                 PZC 9/14/10
                                                                                                                   Page 269
                                                       LEGAL NOTICE
                                                       TOWN OF AVON

At a meeting held on September 14, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon voted as follows:

App. #4495 -       West Avon LLC, owner, Frank Noe, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VI.B.3.a.of Avon
                   Zoning Regulations to permit Class 1 restaurant, 427 West Avon Road, Parcel 4520427, in an NB Zone.
                   APPROVED WITH CONDITION.

App. #4497 -       Brighenti, Michael, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section IV.A.5.of Avon Zoning
                   Regulations to permit a waiver of the density for a first division of land, 38 Pine Hill Road, Parcel 3560038,
                   in an RU2A Zone. APPROVED.

App. #4501 -       Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Special Exception under Section IV.A.6. of Avon Zoning
                   Regulations to permit reduction in minimum landscaped area, 267 & 281 Country Club Road and 10
                   Sunnybrook Drive, Parcels 1940267, 1940281, and 4170010, in R30 and R40 Zones. APPROVED WITH
                   CONDITIONS.

App. #4502 -       Town of Avon, owner/applicant, request for Site Plan Approval to permit addition to existing library, 267 &
                   281 Country Club Road and 10 Sunnybrook Drive, Parcels 1940267, 1940281, and 4170010 in R30 and R40
                   Zones. APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.

App. #4503 -       Farmington Bank, owner, Sign Pro, Inc., applicant, request for Special Exception under Section VII.C.4.b.(2)
                   of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit low-profile detached identification sign, 310 West Main Street, Parcel
                   4540310, in a CR Zone. APPROVED WITH CONDITION.

App. #4504 -       E. Martin and Marie Cornelio, owners, E. Martin Cornelio, applicant, request for Special Exception under
                   Section III.G.4.f. of Avon Zoning Regulations to permit regrading below the 100-year floodplain, 2 Wills
                   Walk, Parcel 5960002, in an R40 Zone. APPROVED.

App. #4505 -       Margaret Connoy, owner, Roy Connoy, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section IV.A.4.s. of
                   Avon Zoning Regulations to permit a professional office in the home, 95 Secret Lake Road, Parcel 3890095,
                   in an R15 Zone. APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.

App. #4506 -       Avon Marketplace Investors, LLC, owner, Poyant Signs, applicant, request for Site Plan Modification to add
                   awnings, Avon Marketplace, 380 West Main Street, Parcel 4540380, in a CR Zone. APPROVED.

App. #4509 -       Donald Jakubiak, owner, Weatherstone LLC, applicant, request for Special Exception under Section III.H. of
                   Avon Zoning Regulations to permit earth removal, 47 Lofgren Road, Parcel 3030047, in an R40 Zone.
                   APPROVED WITH CONDITION.

Dated at Avon this 15th day of September, 2010. Copy of this notice is on file in the Office of the Town Clerk, Avon Town
Hall.

                                         PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
                                                   Duane Starr, Chairman
                                         Douglas Thompson, Vice-Chairman/Secretary

								
To top