MINUTES

June 7, 2007

PRESENT: K. Grunwald (staff), J. A. Bobbitt, A. Kennefick, Jan Scottron (guest), Tim Veillete (staff), Lon Hultgren (staff), J. Brubacher, S. Thomas, G. Padick (staff)

REGRETS: M. Hart, G. Cole

I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS: members and guests introduced themselves.

II. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE: no comments.

III. REVIEW OF MINUTES: the minutes of the May 17, 2007 meeting were accepted as written.

IV. COMMUNICATIONS:

A. Agenda

B. May 17, 2007 Minutes

C. Brecht Associates: “Trends”

V. DISCUSSION:

A. Lon Hultgren and Tim Veillete of the Department of Public Works: Civil Engineering Project; Concept Site Plans: L. Hultgren and T. Veillette reported that this project was done to attempt to address potential problems of the proposed site adjacent to the Community Center. A more detailed analysis would be done as we move forward in this process. A 50,000 sq. ft. and a 30,000 sq. ft. structure (120 units) were considered. These concepts did not take into account any sub-surface (ledge) issues. The need to locate a road and the wetlands were taken into consideration. This study could be used as a preliminary step for further work to be done. Next steps: needs to begin serious negotiations with Uconn regarding the location of the road (George Krause or Jim Bradley). Also, need to look at providing a buffer to residents of Eastwood Rd. G. Padick raised a concern about the proposed designs requiring residents to cross the new road to get to the Community Center. K. Grunwald will make copies of the plans for all members. G. Padick also raised concerns about the location of the roadway relative to the location of the facility. J. Brubacher raised questions regarding the location of the new road to the campus from Rt. 44. N. Sheehan feels that the proximity to downtown is critical to attracting residents for independent living.

B. Update on Request for Qualifications: No formal responses to the RFQ have been received, although several developers have expressed interest. We will invite a representative from Masonicare to our next meeting, and will also consider locating a representative from Erikson M. Hart has sent the RFQ to Leyland Alliance, developer of the Mansfield Downtown Partnership.

C. Updates on contacts with University representatives: J. Brubacher has spoken with Ed Marth from AAUP to encourage university support for this project. The goal at this time is to keep potential partners informed regarding this project and to be prepared to enlist support for more specific initiatives.

D. Impact of this project on the Mansfield Downtown Partnership (G. Cole): G. Padick explained that Planning and Zoning has been reviewing proposed changes for the downtown area, and the question has come up regarding who the residential component will be aimed at. At this point potential interest seems to be primarily “active adults”, but the residential component will be market driven. The “green space” in this development will be limited. It may be helpful to bring Cynthia Van Zelm and Macon Toledano in to meet with this group. A. Kennefick raised questions regarding mobility issues, and felt that an A/I living facility may be better located with more proximity to the downtown. Much discussion followed regarding the design of the facility and the importance of locating it in close proximity to the downtown.

E. “Other”: J. A. Bobbitt suggested that we stay in touch with MCNR re:the status of this project (K. Grunwald will follow-up). J. Brubacher asked about other potential properties; G. Padick reported that the developer who had an option on the Warren property has let the option lapse because they apparently determined that there is not adequate water on the property. The university will not connect them to the water supply. J. A. Bobbitt re-emphasized the importance of this committee soliciting support from University representatives.

VI. SCHEDULE FOR FUTURE MEETINGS: The next meeting will be June 21. It was determined that for a summer schedule it may be advisable to poll members prior to the meeting to ensure that we have 4 members for each meeting.

VII. ADJOURNMENT: meeting adjourned at 10:25 AM

Respectfully submitted,

Kevin Grunwald