TOWN OF GREENWICH
2009 PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
DOWNTOWN PLANNING COMMITTEE
DRAFT MINUTES
The 44th Meeting of the Downtown Committee was held on Monday, October 24th, 2011
8:30 AM in the Mazza Room.
Attendance
Donald Landsman, Jane Marsh, Leslie Tarkington, Carol Zarrilli, Lori Jackson, Mary
Hull, Jack Moffly, Marcia O’Kane, Peter Tesei, Ellen Brennan-Galvin, Heidi Smith,
Donald Heller, and Allen Corry
Members unable to attend: Lisa Baker, Terry Betteridge, Peter Sutton, J. Suzanne GeissRobbins,Dustin Anderson, Melissa Evans, Amy Siebert, Diane Fox, Paul Marchese,
Richard Maitland
Guests – Peter Berg, Valerie Stauffer
1. Chairperson H. Smith greeted those in attendance and brought the committee to
order at 8:35 AM
2. First Vote Recommendations –
a. Final Vote on LJ3– Coordinated Transportation Information –
“We recommend the Town provide cohesive information about the transportation
alternatives. Such information should include all public transportation options and
be available on the Town website, with schedules available at key locations including
the Chamber of Commerce and Town buildings.
Discussion followed regarding on various alternatives in use.
Votes in the Affirmative:
-Brennan-Galvin
-Hull
-Jackson
-Landsman
-Marsh
-Moffly
-O’Kane
-Smith
-Tarkington
-Zarrilli
Votes in the Negative:
-None
Abstentions:
-None
b. Final Vote on JDM4- HBS10 – Public Private Partnerships –
“We recommend that the Town of Greenwich encourage, where appropriate,
Public-Private Partnerships as a cooperative venture to develop projects, services,
or facilities for the general public, subject to the described conditions.”
1
Discussion followed regarding legal ramifications of such partnerships, their
existence in Town and the past experience. Questionable maintenance of
such gifts on an ongoing basis was noted as well as the need for the Town to
maintain control.
Votes in the Affirmative:
-Brennan-Galvin
-Hull
-Jackson
-Landsman
-Marsh
-Moffly
-O’Kane
-Smith
-Tarkington
-Zarrilli
Votes in the Negative:
-None
Abstentions:
–None
c. Final Vote on DBB2 – Addendum to Greenwich Boundaries –
“The Boundaries Sub-committee evaluated what building zones comprise the
Central Business District (CBD), outlining the area of commerce, as it directly
relates to the Greenwich Central Business District. With commerce, services, and
destination businesses in mind, the perimeters are defined by current zoning
regulations and the Sub-committee strongly considered the residential
neighborhoods bordering the CBD. These perimeters limit the expansion of
commercial, retail and office space beyond the CBD, and limits commercial and
retail from encroaching into residential districts.”
Discussion followed the placement of the Addendum in relation to the
Original Recommendation. Voting for the Addendum is separate from the
vote for the Boundaries as defined.
Votes in the affirmative:
-Brennan-Galvin
- Jackson
- Hull
- Landsman
- Marsh
- Moffly
- O’Kane
- Smith
- Tarkington
-Zarrilli
Votes in the negative:
-None
Abstentions:
-None
d. Final Vote on HBS13 - Roger Sherman Baldwin Park
“We recommend implementing the walking loop in the Roger Sherman Baldwin
Park designed originally by F. Olmsted Jr. and recently updated. This walking
2
loop, running the entire perimeter of the Park would begin at the brick entrance
west of the Arch Street teen center.
Improvements in the plantings, park signage, and the addition of trees in the
parking areas and additional benches and picnic tables would create an appealing
park for passive recreation.”
Discussion centered on references and details of plan.
Votes in the affirmative:
- Brennan-Galvin
- Jackson
- Hull
- Landsman
- Marsh
- Moffly
- O’Kane
- Smith
- Tarkington
-Tesei
-Zarrilli
Votes in the negative:
- None
Abstentions:
-None
f. First Vote on HBS14 - Town of Greenwich Parks and Recreation Building
“We recommend repurposing the Department of Parks and Recreation building
located adjacent to the Greenwich Ferry facility for another Community use which
maximizes this wonderful waterfront location and whose function is one for the
Community.”
Discussion focused on the fact that this recommendation is subject to the
relocation of the Parks Department from the waterfront location and the
possibilities for the building this key location.
Votes in the affirmative:
-Brennan-Galvin
- Jackson
- Hull
- Landsman
- Marsh
- Moffly
- O’Kane
- Smith
- Tarkington
- Tesei
- Zarrilli
Votes in the negative:
-None
Abstentions:
-None
g. First Vote on HBS16 – I95 Exit 3 Entrance and Exit Ramps
“The exit and entrance ramps of I95 at Exit 3 are Greenwich’s Front Door. The
Town of Greenwich should develop a plan in collaboration with the Department of
Transportation to improve the surrounding green space with landscaping.
Additionally, the walkways underneath the I95 highway and Metro North need to
3
be refurbished and maintained to promote the inter-connective characteristics of the
area south of the railroad.
Discussion centered on existing state and local programs which allow
beautification around federal highways including CT DOT.
Votes in the affirmative:
-Brennan-Galvin
- Jackson
- Hull
- Landsman
- Marsh
- Moffly
- O’Kane
- Smith
-Tarkington
- Tesei
- Zarrilli
Votes in the negative:
- None
Abstentions:
- None
j. First and Final Vote – DDB3 Retaining Neighborhood Character and
Quality of Life in the CBG Zone
“The Boundaries Sub-Committee recommends that the Planning and Zoning
Commission (“P&Z”) retain the residential character of the Downtown by not
permitting further expansion of the intensive zoning, which could cause the mix to
further infiltrate the downtown residential neighborhoods. The residential
character of the Downtown should not evolve with additional urban characteristics.
It is important that future development of Mason Street be guided in a manner not
to further the urbanization of the Downtown.
Parameters should be placed on all CGB (Central Greenwich Business) zoning, to
include CGB, CGB-HO (Central Greenwich Business-Historic Overlay), CGBR–
HO (Central Greenwich Business Residential–Historic Overlay) GB (General
Business), and GB-HO (General Business–Historic Overlay) and GBO (General
Business-Office) zoned properties within the CBD’s boundaries to require
residential zoning be included on the third floor.”
Discussion centered around the differences between HBS19 and DBB3. In
particular the current level of residential in the CBD and statements in the
POCD encouraging increased residential.
Votes in the affirmative:
-Brennan-Galvin
- Jackson
- Hull
- Landsman
- Marsh
- Moffly
- O’Kane
- Smith
- Tarkington
-Tesei
-Zarrilli
Votes in the negative:
-None
Abstentions:
-None
4
The meeting adjourned at 10:25 AM.
5