►
Description
Groton, Connecticut municipal meeting: Planning and Zoning Commission June 14, 2021. Click on the link below to view the agenda.
https://www.agendasuite.org/iip/groton/file/getfile/53724
A
C
C
Next
item
is
our
work
business,
which
is
our
workshop
for
mystic
education,
center
zoning
tax.
Amendment
and
john
have
some
something
to
say
to
us
before
we
start
yes,
please,
good
evening:
everybody,
I'm
reiner
director
of
planning
and
development
services
thanks
for
coming
along,
so
I
just
want
to
kind
of
set
a
little
bit
of
a
framework
and
start
kind
of
the
general
discussion
and
understanding
for
how
we
want
to
move
forward.
C
So
you
know
dev,
and
I
have
been
kind
of
going
back
and
forth
a
little
bit
about
what
is
the
best
way
to
kind
of
move.
This
entire
item
forward
with
the
zoning
regulations-
and
you
know
we
don't
have
a
formal
application.
Yet
we
look
at
this
soon
becoming
a
town
application
for
a
zoning
text
amendment
and
something
that
came
up
recently.
C
So
it'll
become
part
of
the
record.
We
just
want
to
make
sure
that
any
information
that's
coming
anyone's
way
is
all
part
of
the
public
record
and
that
there's
no
concerns
about
ex-parte
communication
or
anything
like
that
outside
of
meetings.
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
you
know
I
know.
Sometimes
we
might
sound
like
we're
beating
a
dead
horse
on
that
one,
but
it's
always
something
that
we're
just
cognizant
on
with
all
of
our
applications.
So
I
want
to
kind
of
put
that
out
there.
C
Does
everybody
on
the
commission
think
that
the
zoning
on
the
property
should
be
changed
and
if
so,
how
should
we
do
that?
So
you
know
before
we
kind
of
continue
down
the
path
we
were
going
before.
There
might
be
a
a
fork
that
we
have
to
take,
or
maybe
we
need
to
kind
of
stop
in
the
road
around
a
little
bit.
You
know
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
going
in
the
right
direction.
C
Great
question:
are
we
going
to
go
one
by
one
down
the
commission
on
this
one,
but
I
want.
Did
you
have
anything
more
to
say,
john?
Well,
I
I
wanted
to
kind
of
you
know:
should
the
zoning
be
changed?
Looking
at
the
memo
that
I
put
together,
some
of
them,
it
goes
along
not
exactly
hand
in
hand
with
the
outline
that
the
chair
had
put
together,
but
I
think
a
lot
of
it
kind
of
blend.
Well,
together,
you
know
the
first
couple
of
pieces
about
zoning.
C
So
that's
what
we
were
hoping
to
get
out
of
tonight
a
little
bit.
Not
necessarily
should
the
height
be
x,
or
should
it
be
y,
but
setting
the
framework
a
little
bit
more
again
by
taking
a
big
step
back
to
make
sure
we're
getting
some
consistent
feedback
from
the
commission
as
well
as
going
through
those
discussion,
topics
that
the
chair
had
put
together.
C
C
About
to
get
back
to
the
process,
I
did
lay
out
what
I
thought
were
an
organization
of
the
topics
to
to
discuss,
since
it's
sort
of
wide
open
area-
and
I
thought
the
best
way
would
be
to
take
the
major
issues
and
try
to
get
people's
thoughts.
You
know
looking
at
the
thing
at
a
ten
thousand
foot
level
and
not
down
in
the
weeds
and
go
down
in
our
usual
order,
which
is,
I
just
use
the
legit.
The.
C
Listing
of
personality
as
the
order
there's
nothing
special
about
that
and
try
to
make
sure
everybody's
or
sort
of
has
an
understanding
of
what
we're
talking
about
and
then
start
talking
about.
What
are
potential
uses
for
the
property
now
starting
off
with
almost
a
clean
slate
and
eventually
getting
down
to
more
details
of
what
the.
C
Just
sort
of
have
a
brief
understanding
of
what
the
property
is
we're
talking
about.
You
know
this.
The
size
of
the
property
is
48..
There
are
two
actual
state
properties.
One
is,
I
think,
240
oral
hill
road
and
the
other
is
eight
oral
hill
road.
I
believe
it
is
what
the
big
one
is:
a
240,
that's
a
40
acre
site
and
the
other
ones
on
the
other
side
of
oral
hill.
C
Road
is
just
under
eight
acres
and
looking
at
some
of
the
the
constraints
we
have
is
that
road
access
is
sort
of
limited
based
on
it's
off
of
oral
hill
road,
which
is
a
fairly
narrow,
run-down
axis
way.
However,
it
does
have
good
access
from
a
close
proximity
to
the
interstate
interchange
at
exit.
89.
C
C
C
And
the
next
thing,
I
think,
is
the
important
part
is
to
start
talking
about
potential
uses
for
the
property
that
it
may
not
want
to
be
limited
just
to
residential
uses,
but
many
specific
types
or
mixed
uses
or
certain
other
other
uses
that
could
be
done
on
the
property,
and
I
here
I
think
we
are
trying
to
bring
out
as
many
opportunities
as
we
can.
Think
of
so
we
don't
miss
anything
that
might
turn
out
to
be
a
good
use,
rather
than
just
trying
to
limit
it
now.
C
So
with
that
I'd
like
to
I'll
start
with
michael
caine
and
just
to
go
over
what
he
thinks
and
just
go
over
what
you
think
our
potential
uses
that
sort
of
a
general
description.
I
don't
think
we
have
to
get
down
to
real
details,
but
just
general
types
of
of
items
and
then
later
in
the
process,
we'll
go
down
to
maybe
some
of
the
parameters
we
want
to
or
limits
we
want
to
put
on
the
development.
C
So
I'll
start
with
you
mike.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
I'll
try
to
address
some
of
these
things
and
I'm
excited
to
hear
what
other
people
are
going
to
say,
so
I
might
want
to
contribute
a
little
bit
more
after
I
hear
more,
but
I
think
I'll
just
try
to
answer
some
of
the
questions
that
have
been
raised,
that
how
I
feel
at
this
point,
I'm
sorry,
I'm
glad
that
we're
like
you
know
if
we
could
start
with
a
clean
slate.
C
I
think
that
would
be,
I
think,
would
be
remiss
to
do
that.
I
I
recognized
that
there
are
institutional
buildings
there
and
there
have
been
institutional
buildings
there.
Historically,
the
town
has
used
those
and
that,
if
they
those
can
be
used,
I
would
be
okay
with
that,
whether
or
not
they
can.
That
would
have
to
be
determined
that
it.
You
know
whether
it's
cost
effective
or
spectacle.
C
C
I
would
like
to
think
that
maybe
there
could
be
some
residential
houses
in
a
place
like
this.
You
know
single
family
homes
or
two
family
homes.
I
think
that
that
would
be
appropriate
for
an
area
like
this
and
if
you
would
because,
with
already
in
that
area,
how
many
and
you
know
how
dense
it
is
I'd
like
to
hear
what
other
people
have
leave
it
at
that
for
now.
A
B
I
wouldn't
mind
actually,
starting
by
one
thing
I
think
we
should
discuss
is
step
back
even
farther.
Take
the
observation
balloon
up
a
little
higher
than
we're
thinking
where
right
now
we're
saying:
okay,
let's
just
step
out
look
at
the
clean
slate,
but
we
actually
just
finished
a
town-wide
plan
of
conservation
development
for
the
whole
town.
B
B
A
B
B
That
scares
me
a
little
bit
less
just
because
one
thing
that
keeps
slipping
on
most
of
the
things
that
all
the
graphics
that
we
keep
saying
is
how
much
of
that
area
of
town
is
not
available
for
development,
because,
yes,
it's
a
great
big
developable
area
cleared
area.
You
see
plus
a
little
more
and
everything
to
the
west
of
it,
no
matter
what
we're
talking
about
developing
an
enormous
chunk
of
the
town
on.
B
Isn't
even
turning
it
over
that's
a
good
thing,
so
I'm
I'm
okay
with
really
rethinking
the
zoning,
that's
where
the
oral
school
is
and
to
the
left
of
it.
I'm
not
thinking
at
this
point,
based
on
what
the
entire
town
looks
like
changing
it
dramatically
from
anything
that
already
exists
in
that
area.
It's
opportunities!
I
understand
that,
because
it's
a
flat
site,
there's
a
farm
there,
we'd
say
great:
it's
a
flat
side
that
doesn't
mean
it
doesn't
make
it
any
closer
to
a
grocery
store.
There
is
none,
there
doesn't
make
it
any
closer
to.
B
To
drive
to
a
grocery
store
location,
it's
not
a
good
location
for
many
residences,
they're
completely
car
dependent,
and
we
should
envision
that.
Yes,
you
can
put
a
couple
little
convenience
things
in
there
for
it,
but
that's
not
the
bulk
of
it.
Everyone's
gonna
be
jumping
into
the
car
this
route.
We
have
that
building
that
people
keep
talking
about
that
historically.
B
B
B
B
A
B
B
But
I'm
not
quite
sure
what,
because
of
its
lack
of
services,
there's
no
gas
station
up
there,
there's
just
nothing!
That's
there!
That
makes
it
a
good
place
to
put
too
many
residences
kind
of
the
basis
for
housing.
Is
you
put
the
people
where
the
things
are,
and
here
there's
no
things:
we'd
have
to
come
up
with
things
and
we're.
B
C
This
is
the
piece
of
the
town
good
point,
so
thanks
in
looking
at
this,
I
agree
with
michael
and
hell
said,
and
I
think
that's
how
really
things
are
set
up.
I
mean
our
plan
of
conservation
and
development,
the
pocd
as
it's
known
and
our
regulations
are
clear,
they're,
protective
and
they're,
consistent
and
starting
with
the
pocd,
and
what
this
says.
Of
course
it
says
the
area
is
sensitive
to
development,
the
area
for
the
oral
school
and,
as
we
know,
a
large
project
was
not
contemplated
in
the
pocd.
C
C
C
C
I
was
just
curious
about
both
what
we
see
now
for
the
buildings
and
what
has
been
torn
down
and,
in
fact
it
was.
It
seems
to
me
that
the
coverage
they
had
there
with
those
large
buildings
at
least
area
wise,
would
have
been
consistent
with
the
you
80
sony,
but
for
the
buildings
themselves
as
they
are.
I
agree
with
how
the
abilities
are
just
they're,
not
historic,
and
because
builders
sometimes
can
come
up
with
terrific
ideas
for
things
that
are
old
and
not
historic.
C
C
You
look
at
the
details
of
what's
allowed
in
this
particular
zone.
There
are
a
lot
of
general
things
that
could
certainly
work
with
some
of
the
people
that
were
interested
in
developing
the
sites
on
the
other
people
and
maybe
the
current
one
that
there's
an
agreement
with,
but
I
think
that's
I
don't
know
how
you
would
start
anywhere
else
than
with
what
you
have
so
that's
all.
I
have
for
you.
C
It's
both
mute
here.
I
like
john's
question
in
the
beginning.
That
was
asking
kind
of
the
fundamental
question.
If
we
would
change
anything
if
this
developer
never
showed
up-
and
I
don't
think
we
would
based
on
a
lot
of
stuff
that
sue
just
said,
you
know
this
was
not
in
the
pocd
and
it
certainly
wasn't
something
that
was
screaming
at
us
that
you
know,
we've
had
other
places
in
town
that
actually
do
scream.
You
know,
I
think
it
was
117.
C
C
C
You
know
small
medical
facilities,
I
think,
would
be
good
for
that
which
would
not
generate
you,
know
tremendous
amount
of
traffic
or
in
these
centers
we
had
talked
about.
You
know
a
small
little.
You
know
research
centers,
and
I
know
that
these
spring
up
in
various
places,
but
you
know
some
kind
of
unification
and
actually,
who
was
there
before
in
one
of
the
buildings,
get
the
name?
C
It
was
a
technology
company
yeah
I
I
forget,
but
they
were
leasing
space
in
one
of
the
buildings
there,
foreign
and
then
you
know,
data
centers,
which
again
you
know,
are
properly
popping
up
all
over
the
place.
So
I
think
there's
plenty
of
good
uses
that
you
know
could
use
a
piece
of
property
that
would
have
minimal
impact
on
the
surrounding
areas.
Still
be
you
know,
tax
tax
revenue,
maybe
not
a
school,
but
I
mean
certain
other
facilities-
would
certainly
be
tax
generators
and
and
wouldn't
have
the
the
negative
impacts.
C
C
I'm
sure
so,
like
a
lot
of
the
other
commissioners,
I
went
back
to
some
templates
and
some
history
here
and
I
started
similar
to
what
suit
brought
up
and
others
on
the
district
plan
of
concept
of
conservation,
and
I
believe
that,
since
we
have
already
set
that
template
anything,
we
do
to
change
that
template
needs
a
process
we
do.
It
doesn't
need
a
floating
zone.
We
do.
I
believe
we
need
to
go
back
to
the
town
of
rotten
and
say.
C
But
at
the
same
time,
I
I
visited
it
just
this
week
to
really
look
at
the
buildings
and
destroy
what
hal
said
to
say.
You
know,
and
I
believe,
there's
an
editorial
about
this
in
a
local
newspaper.
How
important
are
those
brick
buildings?
You
know
and
they're,
not
historic.
It's
not
downtown
mystic,
it's
not
another
fire
district,
like
noaa,
it's
a
nice
old
building.
In
my
belief,
if
we
choose
to
move
forward
a
floating
zone,
we're
not
opposed
to,
but
the
first
embrace
is
the
mission
of
the
town.
C
The
whole
town
will
live
around
it.
The
citizen
input
that
the
town
must
garner.
First,
if
we're
going
to
change
the
plan
of
conservation,
there
are
a
couple
of
really
good
zoning
changes
in
our
particular
area
that
actually
stonington
did
and
as
sue
reference
perkins
farm,
which
I
was
very
involved
with
from
from
the
very
start,
the
greenway
development
you
know,
created
a
town-wide
embrace
of
that
particular
property,
but
it
was
created
prior
to
that
property
being
built.
C
C
I
think
they've
done
a
great
job
with
perkins
farm,
so
something
that
is
very
planned
as
steve
brought
up
that
as
part
of
the
whole.
I
would
support
a
great
deal,
but
if
you're
not
talking
to
the
neighbors-
and
we
think
we're
going
to
make
a
dramatic
change
of
the
ru
80
zone,
that
doesn't
appear
to
be
part
of
the
mission
of
this
commission
nor
of
agnes.
C
That
type
of
thing
you
might
be,
I
was
wondering
whether
you
could
put
a
boutique
hotel
there.
A
small
hotel
might
be
different,
but
there's
so
many
other
facilities
like
that
around
here.
There's,
probably
no
advantage
to
doing
that.
You
could
put
a
convention
center
in
but
again
it
might
generate
too
much
traffic
whatever
we
do
it,
it
has
to
take
the
traffic
development
concern
seriously
because
it
it's
just
not
realistic
to
try
to
put
something
in.
It
requires
a
lot
of
traffic
going
in
and
out
of
the
facility.
C
C
C
C
C
Type
of
you
know,
light
manufacturing,
active
senior
housing,
so
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
choices,
nursing
facility
residential
life,
so
it's
not
like
there
are
no
choices
in
the
ru-80
and
a
lot
of
these
choices
would
have
put
some
of
the
young
people
interested
in
doing
things
in
the
last
round.
So
I
do
think
it's
something
to
consider
if,
in
fact
it
isn't
I
mean
it
sounds
by
the
name
of
it.
It's
going
to
be
very
restrictive,
but
in
fact
it
does
allow
a
lot
of
pretty
large
scale
developments.
C
C
I
think
I
agree
with
that.
I
think
the
classic
case
is
a
swimming
pool
like
we
have
so
much
critical
mass
now
with
the
schools,
the
middle
school,
the
high
school
senior
center,
and
then,
of
course,
we
have,
I
guess,
a
kind
of
a
rec
center
and
there
certainly
are
a
lot
of
theaters
around
town
or
across
the
river,
but
either
river.
But
I
think
yeah
a
pool
would
be
a
really
nice
idea,
but
it's
just
it
would
be
the
wrong
place
in
my
humble
opinion.
C
Well,
it
might
cost
more
to
rehab
the
pool
than
it
would
be
to
say
put
it
in
the
old
fitz
jr
high
school
building.
Wait
we're
on
some
piece
of
the
town
has
adjacent
to
some
of
these
others,
plus
it
has
parking
there
too.
You
know,
and
it
might
make
more
sense
to
to
look
at
the
financial
aspect
of
it,
especially
if
we're
going
to
pay
for
it
by
tiff.
B
I
think
this
might
be
a
case
where,
50
years
from
now,
if
we
were
to
rehab
that
pool
at
great
cost
cool
the
next
one
in
town
generation
from
now
people
who
hadn't
attended.
This
meeting
would
think
what
the
heck
were.
We
thinking
when
we
put
a
pool
at
that
corner
when
we've
got
actually,
we've
got
a
dream
situation
with
school
and
administration
center
and
playing
fields
in
the
center
in
the
absent
center
of
town.
C
You
know
just
historically
what
we
have
struggled
with
on
this
mission
for
the
longest
time
is:
defining
rotten's
downtown.
We
we
didn't,
have
it
but
it,
but
actually
I
think
it's
starting
to
happen
and
it
and
where
we
know
it,
it's
the
area
between
the
library
and
the
top
of
fort
hill
and
and
the
town
hall
is
beginning
to
actually
look
like
the
at
the
center
of
our
town,
and
then
we
have
the
shopping
district.
C
I
think
that
this
kind
of
development
would
be.
You
know
that
there
was
high
density,
would
be
perfect
in
that
area
or
where
around
the
shopping
centers.
But
it's,
I
think
what
what
you
said
before.
How
was
this
creating
of
a
new
node
which
and
and
this
idea
of
I
mean
this-
is
the
definition
of
sprawl
to
me,
and
I
I
think
that
it's
really
trying
to
create
a
part
of
town
that
that
wouldn't
naturally
occur
unless
we
force
it,
it
means
it
fails
in
20
years.
C
C
You
know
it's
that
mixed
use,
no
ant
village,
it's
that
mixed
use,
hopefully
someday
fame
street,
could
come
back.
Those
kinds
of
neighborhoods
worked,
but
I
think
for
us
to
think
that
we're
going
to
create
that
in
a
vacuum
in
the
northeast
part
of
the
town,
is
you
know?
I
don't
know
these
things
don't
happen
because
someone
planned
them
it's
because
people
go
where
the
things
are,
which
is
your
things
out
there?
C
C
C
We've
got
some
really
dif.
Some
of
them
are
very
light.
Adjustments
to
the
property
I
was.
I
was
surprised
to
see
that,
but
that
was
our
business
plan
yeah,
but
jeff
you've
been
pretty
specific.
This
is
about
the
nbc,
it's
not
about
the
developer
or
everything
else
out
there.
So
it
is
a
new
sleeper
new
sleeve
for
us
new
sleep
yeah,
that's
right!
C
And
why
it
survived
now
it's
like
if
you
go,
look
at
there's
a
lot
of
further
in
the
mall.
You
know
20
years
ago.
That
was
the
latest
thing
now
look
at
it.
It's
going
to
go
to
nothing,
they'll
be
bringing
in
the
building
records
or
turn
it
into
a
condo
development,
because
it's
not
a
natural
location.
C
There
has
to
be
something
else
that
makes
people
want
to
want
to
be
there
or
go
through
there
and
with
the
water
ways
around
here.
Where
bridges
you
end
up
with
population,
I
mean
that's
where
ole
miss
it
was
originally.
It
was
built
there
because
the
water
wasn't
in
waterway.
Wasn't
an
impediment
to
moving
people.
C
C
B
B
C
Well,
I
mean
you
know
truthfully
when
you
head
north
on
I-95,
the
next
exit
is
stonington
right:
you've
left,
groton,
yeah
and
and
heading
south
you're.
I
don't
you
know
I
mean.
Certainly
I
don't
think
the
highway
is
the
best
way
if
you
want
people
to
to
to
live
and
what
what
is
it,
let
live
and
play,
and
all
this
stuff
the
highway
isn't
the
way
to
get
there.
C
I
personally
don't
enjoy
driving
on
the
highway.
I
try
to
avoid
it,
but
I
think
it
should
be
this
kind
of.
If
you
get
a
big
development,
it
should
be
walkable,
it
should
be
bicycleable,
it
should
be
public
transportation
and
workforce
force-feeding.
This
thing
hoping
that
it'll
grow,
and
I
think
that
it
looks
like
you
want
it
to
grow.
C
C
B
C
B
B
B
C
I
would
say
that
that
that
might
be
the
case,
given
that
it's
sewer,
you
know
that
the
the
sewer
have
being
sewered
would
allow
for
a
little
bit
more
density,
but
I
think
that
also,
in
the
same
that
the
feeder
roads
to
this
area
are
are
right.
Dangerous,
cal,
hill
road
is
is
very
dangerous,
and
I
think
that
you
have
to
be
very
careful
about.
You
know
how
much
density
is
up
there,
because
it's
going
to
mean
enormous
improvements
and
expense
to
the
town.
C
C
C
My
good
friend
was
the
previous
owner
of
the
adams
house
and
standing
in
his
driveway,
and
he
was
backing
out
and
of
course,
slammed
into
him
yeah,
because
he
was
coming
up
that
hill
so
fast
and
he
came
over
to
rise
and
boom.
Well,
the
road
there
is
just
about
as
narrow
as
can
be,
and
I
believe
also
that
I
mean
there's
ledge
in
that
area
too.
So
that's
what
that
hill
is.
It's
all
you
know
I
don't
know.
C
C
Well,
I
assume
that's
what
the
outcome
of
what
we're
doing
tonight,
so
this
is
john
just
jumping
in
for
a
second
right
now,
it's
just
deb
myself,
paige
no
consultants
of
the
towns
or
advising
or
sitting
on
this
meeting
right
now
we're
trying
to
get
a
gauge
of
where
we
go.
I
think
a
lot
of
what
I've
gotten
tonight
is
without
a
change
to
the
pocd
mission
is
not
looking
for
any
drastic
changes
to
the
zoning.
C
There
might
be
some
sense
of
changing
it
down
to
ru,
but
even
that,
I'm
not
sure
we
really
just
a
couple
folks
spoken
about
that,
and
now
one
of
the
potential
option
or
path
we
could
go
on
that
we
had
discussed
12
18
months
ago,
was
modifying
the
institutional
reuse,
zoning
text
as
it
related
to
this
proc,
this
property,
or
just
in
general.
That
was
a
section
of
the
zoning
regulations
that
we
did
not
get
to
when
we
did
the
larger
rewrite.
C
There
might
be
some
applicability
there,
but
I'm
also
not
hearing
a
lot
of
census
from
the
commission
that-
or
I
think
I
heard
it
pretty
loud
and
clear
that
those
buildings
aren't
really
that
important
to
the
commission
efforts.
So
I
don't
know
how
important
the
institutional
reuse
would
really
be,
because
the
main
purpose
of
that
is
salvaging
and
saving
the
older
buildings
when
they
had
that
tour.
It
looks.
A
C
A
C
That,
well,
we
just
you
know
with
the
building
of
the
new
schools.
I
mean
I
could
a
west
side
school
here
in
this
in
gra
in
the
city
seemed
to
me
like
it
wasn't
that
bad
of
a
building
you
know
it
could
have
been
worked
with,
but
it
proved
that
it
wasn't
and
and
even
a
building
that
was
in
good
his
condition
as
the
west
side
school,
which
was
you
know,
occupied
right
up
until
the
wrecking
ball
hit
it.
C
These
buildings
have
been
neglected
for
a
long
time,
and
I
think
that
you're
I
mean
I
just
don't
know
how
how
they
could
be
saved.
Maybe
they
can
be,
but
I
I
think
that
from
what
I've,
what
I've
seen
within
town
with
the
schools
that
we
rebuild,
it's
very
infrequent-
that
trying
to
repair
buildings
that
have
been
neglected,
like
that,
for
as
long
as
they
have
is
cost-effective.
C
I
don't
know
you
know,
maybe
someone
could
tell
me
otherwise,
but
I
don't.
I
don't
know
how
that
works
and
how
those
buildings
work
they're
they
weren't
designed
for
they
were
designed
for
small
classrooms.
You
know
when
you
go
through
them,
that's
what
they
are
and
then
you're
altering
masonry
buildings
which
are
in
poor
condition.
C
A
C
C
C
C
The
buildings
still
need
to
be
remediated
and
there,
I
believe,
are
still
some
waste
issues
in
relation
to
the
dumping
grounds
that
were
on
the
property.
So
there's
still
an
associational
amount
of
cleanup
that
needs
to
happen
on
the
property
and
and
depending
on
which
way
you
go.
If
you
want
to
remove
the
buildings,
the
cost
of
removing
those
is
going
to
be
substantial
and
that's
one
of
the
tricky
parts
with
this
property.
You
know,
I
don't
know
if
people
have
been
watching
some
of
the
news.
C
It's
been
getting
vandalized
graffiti,
there's
a
lot
of
very
unsavory
things
happening
on
that
property
right
now,
and
some
development
of
it,
which
is
going
to
have
a
cost
of
cleanup
associated
with
it
and
a
number.
I
I
don't
even
want
to
put
an
estimate
on
right
now,
but
it's
going
to
be.
You
know
many
millions
of
dollars,
that's
something
that
have
to
get
paid
for
somewhere.
A
C
B
C
If
you
want,
I
think
that
what
we
need
to
focus
on
our
job
in
the
zoning-
and
I
think
that
if
the
buildings
can
be
reused
or
repurposed
great,
if
they
need
to
come
down
in
that,
you
know
either
way.
But
I
think
that
we
have
to
recognize
reiner's
point
that
something
hopefully
should
happen
because
they're
not
safe
at
this
point,
but
I
don't
know
how
we
do
that
as
a
zoning
commission,
I
don't
think
we
can.
We
can
just.
C
C
I
I
would
just
kind
of
I've
been
trying
not
to
say
too
much,
but
just
listen
to
the
commission
during
this,
but
demolition
costs
are
a
huge
part
of
the
property
feasibility
and
that's
something
that
we
really
should
be
looking
at
thinking
about
a
future
use
on
this
property,
because
it's
going
to
be
a
different
property
redevelopment.
So
it's
you
know
the
the
joint
roles
of
the
commission.
C
Are
you
know
the
planning
and
the
zoning
the
zoning
can
help
enable
and
encourage,
but
we
have
to
come
up
with
a
long-term
plan
for
the
site
that
will
help
those
build.
If
you
don't
want
those
buildings
to
be
preserved,
then
what
can
the
commission
do
through
your
functions
as
planning
and
zoning
down,
enable
those
buildings
coming
down
that
doesn't
cost
the
taxpayers,
millions
and
millions
of
dollars?
In
fact,
that's
the
tricky
part
here
and-
and
I
don't
have
a
great
solution
for
you,
but
I
think
that's
part
of
the.
C
What
you've
been
tasked
with
grappling
yeah,
but
that's
got
to
be
a
development
developer,
cost
to
determine
that.
If
he
wants
to
go
estimate,
you
don't
have
the
ability
to
estimate
that
no,
but
you
want
to
enable
the
buildings
to
actually
get
if
you're
allow
the
reuse
of
them.
If
they
can
be
reused.
C
C
It
was
probably
the
more
expensive
option
to
rehab
it.
I
think
so
it
usually
is.
We
did
briefly
talk
about
those
two
other
proposals
at
the
town
council
meeting
last
week.
We
gave
them
a
little
bit
of
an
update
on
things
and
overview,
and
paige
could
certainly
speak
to
these
a
lot
better
than
me,
but
the
two
other
proposals
that
came
in
were
not
viable
projects.
That
was
something
that
was
discussed,
nor
I
mean
one
of
them
required
substantial
changes
to
state
law,
the
town
purchasing
utilities
on
a
long-term
basis.
C
There
are
a
lot
of
assumptions
that
didn't
work
with
it
and
the
other
project
didn't
have
really
a
lot
of
details
and
it
didn't
seem
like
a
feasible
developer.
Moving
forward.
The
developer
that
was
chosen
was
chosen
by
the
state
as
someone
that
could
feasibly
take
a
development
project
forward,
not
necessarily
the
development
that
they
were
proposing.
C
C
The
point
I'm
trying
to
bring
up
is
that
if
we
don't
create
zoning
or
have
zoning
that
enables
for
some
development
to
happen
at
all,
because
if
the
demolition
cost
of
taking
those
buildings
down
far
exceeds
the
value
of
the
land,
the
build
the
land
is
going
to
stay
in
the
state
that
it
is.
Those
buildings
will
continue
to
be
vandalized
until
someone
some
entity
of
the
town,
the
state
others
knocked
down
those
buildings.
That's
the
point.
C
B
Only
had
a
comparison
of
making
it
financially
feasible
to
keep
the
buildings
and
we
never
examined
about
knocking
them
down
from
our
experience
with
the
schools
as
it
was
just
mentioned,
it
came
as
a
surprise
to
me,
and
I
should
be
have
know
better-
that
it
was
financially
better
off
to
knock
down
these
beautiful
buildings.
That's
right,
unusable
building
it.
Probably
it
might
be
cheaper
to
just
knock
it
down.
C
And
in
all
those
instances
you
know
to
take
down
sealy,
it
was
about
a
million
dollars
and
that
or
more
and
that
made
sense
because
then
they're
opposing
you
know:
multi-family
housing,
it's
a
20,
000
square
foot,
fish
building.
I
think,
on
this
site,
we're
looking
at
about
160
000
square
feet
of
building
a
little
different
order
of
magnitude.
A
B
C
C
Well,
this
is
just
another
plan
that
we
need
in
order
for
the
town
to
make
the
decision,
without
that
I
think,
as
jeff
and
everyone
else
has
articulated
we're
not
going
to
offer
up
anything
restricted,
we're
going
to
be
open
to
what
potentially
is
there,
but
we
should
not
define
that
job.
You
know
that
needs
to
be
the
town
and
the
citizens.
We
need
to
get
that
number.
It's
like
the
planet
convert
conservation
on
the
plcd
kevin.
C
C
C
C
At
this
point,
I
feel
like
there's
so
many
unknowns,
it's
hard
for
me
to
feel
like
I'm
being
forced
to
these
decisions.
Well,
the
only
decision
we
would
make
is
is
what
we
want
to
allow
but
allow
for
development
yeah.
I
think
we're
hearing
it.
I
think
a
lot
of
the
things
that
you
said
jeff
you
know,
and
maybe
even
if
the
property
were
broken
up
in
some
way
or
defined
differently,
so
it
doesn't
all
have
to
be
the
same.
C
C
C
B
C
B
C
To
bisect
the
whole
property
into
some
pieces
that
can
be
used
better
and
have
a
better
route
to
the
oil
school
itself.
Well,
that
could
be,
but
the
only
I
mean
the
issue
there
is
that
once
again
it
leads
all
roads
lead
to
the
highway.
That's
true,
and
and
then
I
mean,
if
we
want
this
kind
of
development
or
any
development
up
there
to
benefit,
I
mean
I
would
like
to
see
something
up
there.
If
it's
going
to
benefit
downtown
mystic,
I
want
to
see
it
take
away.
C
A
C
C
That's
slow
development,
it's
not
going
to
have
a
significant
impact,
and
so
that's
why
I'm
I'm
thinking
you
know
the
density
should
for
the
you
know
the
r!
Are
you
80,
maybe
a
little
bit
less,
but
I
don't
see
coming
down
so
much
that
that
we're
making
the
situation
worse
for
the
rest
of
the
town?
No,
you
don't
yeah
sprawl
baby
yeah
before
he
would
be
the
lowest
you'd
want
to
go.
Yeah
maybe
have
a
lot
of
open
space
too.
Well
or
you
know
open
space
development
kind
of
a
thing
you
know
where.
C
C
C
C
C
I
mean,
I
think
what
I'm
hearing
right
now
is
whether
we
go
down
a
course
of
a
pocd
change,
which
is
a
much
larger
community
driven
initiative,
and
I
think,
that's
kind
of
one
potential
direction.
The
other
is
look
at
our
existing
zoning.
Is
it?
Are
you
right
now?
Are
you
80?
Is
it?
Are
you
40,
or
are
you
20,
because
it
has
sewers
there
now
and
as
part
of
that
zone
change,
I
know
hearing.
Definitely
some
infrastructure
improvements
that
people
would
like
to
see
such
as
roadway
improvements.
C
B
C
But
you
know
we
really
can't
require
offsite
improvements
as
part
of
his
own
game.
So
that's
one
of
the
tricky
parts
when
folks
were
talking
about
being
through
to
have
a
better
connection
at
cal
hill.
So
that's
that
is
one
of
the
you
know,
one
of
the
reasons
looking
something
broader
in
the
floating
zone,
with
some
of
the
improvement
for
off-site
improvement.
Special
permits
allow
us
to
do
that
a
little
bit
with
some
off-side
of
movements,
but
that
is
somewhat
limited.
C
C
The
town
was
taking
a
lead
on
if
there
was
a
crafting
of
a
new
zoning
regulation.
But
if
the
commission
doesn't
want
to
go
on
that
project
and
and
doesn't
want
to
amend
the
institutional
reuse,
then
I
think
it's
pretty
clear
how
it
goes
and
it's
yeah.
We
would
entertain
don't
request
for
sonic
change,
because
density
yeah,
maybe
that's
the
best
way
to
handle
it.
C
B
C
A
C
C
C
Are
we
talking
up
there?
Are
you
40?
What
are
we
talking?
Are
you
20?
What
are
we
talking
about?
Well,
yeah,
what
you
know,
I
think
we're
talking
about
density
traffic
households.
However,
those
things
translate.
If
it's
ru
80,
that's
20,
you
could
put
20
houses,
approximately
you'd
have
to
subtract
the
open
space.
10
percent
take
10
percent
yeah.
C
B
C
C
C
C
C
B
C
B
A
B
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
Whether
you
wanted
to
do
it
this
thursday
night
and
get
some
feedback
from
them
or
if
you
want
to
do
it
sometime
in
the
future,
I
don't
know
if
it's
a
good
idea
to
do
it
in
a
workshop,
or
we
should
just
it
would
seem
like.
That
would
be
a
little
premature.
I
think
anybody
would
want
to
think
about.
You
know
if
the
developer
is
going
to
come
up
with
some
ideas.