Planning Commission makes their vote to...

Hi everyone, I wanted to send out the 14 reasons the Planning Commission gave for denying HCA"s zoning application:

1.The uses allowed under the current zoning are reasonable and consistent with the land use policies of the revised general plan.

2.The current Concept Development plans for fallen willow Farm and Broadlands Office Park are consistent with the land use policies of the revised general plan.

3. The current Concept Development Plans are consistent with the policies of the revised Countrywide Transportation Plan supporting the planned transportation network in the vicinity.

4. The currently allowed development conforms to the requirements of the 1972 zoning ordinance and the 1993 zoning ordinance which were in effect at the time of the prior rezonings, subject to any then requested modifications.

5. The development proposal and range of uses proposed are less compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood than the currently allowed office development and range of uses.

6. The currently approved development for a unified office park will result in a more harmonious community in the Broadlands planned unit development that the proposed development.

7. The development proposal produces vehicle trips on the existing and planned road network above or beyond the vehicle trips that would likely be produced by the currently approved office developments.

8. The development proposal will create more traffic on Broadlands BLVD and Route 659 than the currently approved office developments and impair the safety of pedestrian connections, especially in the residential area adjoining the site.

9. The proposed development will generate more noise from sirens, helicopters and trucks on weekends, which the applicant has failed to adequately mitigate and which would negatively impact surrounding uses, including the residential area in the neighborhood, than the unified office park that is currently allowed.

10. The proposed development will generate more light and glare from the building and parking lots at night than the currently permitted unified office park, which would negatively impact surrounding uses, including the residential area in the neighborhood.

11. The height and bulk of the proposed development, including density of .93FAR on the Fallen Willow Farm parcel with no FAR averaging plan will not create as harmonious a community in the Broadlands planned unit development as the unified office park will.

12. The proposed development would change the character of the neighborhood and be inconsistent with the legitimate expectations of the residents who live in Broadlands and who bought their homes in the reliance on the currently approved concept development plans.

13. No changes affecting the neighborhood have occurred since the currently approved concept plan development plans were approved that justify a change in the allowed uses and concept development plans.

14. It is the wrong location for all the reasons discussed, but mainly it's a transportation issue. It is not accessible....


I guess they were listening after all!!!
If you have any questions, etc please let me know. Donna Fortier

 

Is this the exact wording of the decision or a cleaned-up version? It sounds like they took all of the issues we've been discussing over the last few months!

 

Of course they did. You don't think that they came up with these bullet points on their own, do you? I'm sure the commission lifted the issues from whatever anti-hospital brief/submission that was provided to them. If the commission had voted to approve the application, they would have used the pro-hospital talking points to support their decision. This is what politicians/agencies/judges do.

I'm not arguing with these fingings. In fact, I agree with many of them. I'm just saying it shouldn't be a surprise that they adopted the anti-hospital talking points that were provided to them.

 

What is interesting here is that County Staff made a completely different recommendation.

You're right Pats_Fan, and in addition, I am not sure what the "story" is here. This is actually old news. It's not surprising that these were the issues outlined.

What would be valuable is if we had the actual content of the report. I don't trust the source here, and would love to see it in context. If anyone has a link to the actual document and conclusions, that would be helpful.

 

I guess what I'd like to see is what the board based these findings off of. If they are factual then alot of arguments I've been getting hammered on are moot! Hehe. []

 

AFGM, I don't see how you can call this old news, when the hearing only occured October 12, 2004. These findings are a direct quote from the documents. If you don't trust me as a source, I would suggest you simply ignore my posts. It's always interesting how there is always "a story or something fishy" when someone doesn't agree with you. What "story" are you referring to this time?[?]

 

I looked online at the Loudoun County website for any record of the October 12 meeting and can't find any mention of it (no agenda, no appearance on a calendar, no minutes, etc). Do you have hardcopy of the documents you are quoting from, or am I just not looking in the right place?

Edit - just found it on the Loudoun County Government Master calendar for October, but nowhere else.

 

Will be nice to read it all in context and from a valid source. This really is old news, as in last month old news. We've known for sometime now that the PC was going to recommend against the hospital, and we found out last month that they put it on the record. Regardless, it is semantics and not that important.

Additionally, this recommendation came out before the INOVA buy out. Will be interesting to get that data assimilated into the decision process.

 

I don't know what the Planning Commission based their decision on to deny HCA's zoning application, but here's what the Loudoun County Land Use Review AICP Program Manager, Van Armstrong, recommended.

Note: This is rather long, so I'll break it up into several posting.


DATE: October 6, 2004

TO: Loudoun County Planning Commission

FROM: Van Armstrong, AICP Program Manager, Land Use Review

SUBJECT: October 12, 2004 Planning Commission Committee meeting: SPEX 2002-0030, ZCPA 2004-0006, ZCPA 2004-0007, Broadlands Regional Medical Center

Background

On September 13, 2004 the Planning Commission conducted a committee meeting on the Broadlands Regional Medical Center applications. The Commission focused primarily on discussions from staff and the applicant regarding potential transportation impacts from the proposed development. Other discussion included general access to the site and potential impacts to neighbors. Buffering and tree save areas were described. The Commission requested a more detailed analysis and conclusion of the transportation impact and for possible contributions from the applicant. A staff summary of the applications’ review was also requested (see attachment).

Some Commissioners stated that while there are not on-site issues with the proposal, they felt that the general location of the hospital was inappropriate and it would not improve service to remote areas of the County. The Commission agreed to continue discussion to a second committee meeting.

Note: Refer to the September 8 Staff packet for current Proffer Statements and Zoning Modifications.

Issues

The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) responding to comments and issues raised by staff and the Planning Commission. The following issues are recommended for discussion by the Planning Commission:

1. Transportation impacts – Staff and the applicant have researched the status of estimated trip distributions and transportation improvements planned for Route 659 between the Dulles Greenway and Truro Parish Drive. Through proffered rezoning applications (including Broadlands), a Route 659 Transportation Improvement Fund (TIF) has been established to construct roadway improvements (4-lane median divided road with turn lanes). Budget estimates have been created identifying construction funds and costs over $8 million. There are various sources for this fund that include existing County transportation funds, future proffer contributions from rezoning applications, funds from the Virginia Department of Transportation and recent amendment of the VDOT Transportation Improvement Program adding $2.5 million.

Discussions with the applicant has resulted in an agreement that the applicant will provide by special exception condition (new Condition 16) existing proffer contributions associated with the Broadlands Office Park and Fallen Willow Farm at the beginning of the project for the entire 875,000 square feet. Otherwise, approved proffers would provide these proffered funds incrementally with building construction. The proffer contributions of $0.55 per square foot escalated to current dollars would provide an estimated $630,000 for the TIF fund. These funds could assist in accelerating construction of the roadway improvements to Route 659. Staff notes that the special exception uses proposed do not directly generate new vehicle trips from this property greater than the allowable by-right uses already permitted on the site (such as medical office use). However, the applicant agrees that the community will benefit from having these Route 659 improvements constructed as soon as possible to alleviate existing congestion in the area.

2. Tree preservation and landscaping – On Tuesday, September 21, three Planning Commissioners visited the Broadlands site with the applicant, staff and some Broadlands neighbors to examine the existing vegetation and topography. The applicant and representative explained development of the site that would result in removal of much of the vegetation through grading. Location and type of tree save areas and landscaping were discussed. The application currently proposes two tree save areas on the SPEX plat, and requires a Type 2 landscape buffer along Broadlands Boulevard and an enhanced Type 3 buffer (by previous proffer) along Route 659. The applicant has further considered offering additional landscaping on the south side of Broadlands Boulevard to enhance screening in the Homeowners Association common area from Stonewheel Way to Glebe View Drive (new Condition 8).

3. Southeast 3.8 acre site - The applicant has revised a condition (#15) clarifying the use of this property as recreation and open space for the Broadlands’ HOA use on a 3.8 acre site in the southeast corner of the hospital campus. A covered picnic pavilion has been discussed as an optional use along with various landscaping or trails. The applicant will contribute $30,000 towards materials or construction.

Staff Recommendation

Staff finds that the proposal is consistent with the Revised General Plan and applicable zoning ordinances, and supports approval of the applications subject to the proposed proffers (with zoning modifications) and special exception conditions of approval.

Suggested Motions

1. I move that the Planning Commission forward ZCPA 2004-0006, ZCPA 2004-0007 and SPEX 2002-0030, Broadlands Regional Medical Center, to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of approval, subject to the Proffer Statements dated September 8, 2004, the Special Exception conditions of approval dated October 6, 2004, and with the attached Findings for approval.

2. I move an alternate motion.

 

//Part 2 of the October 12, 2004 Planning Commission Committee meeting memo//

ATTACHMENT 1

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL – SPEX 2002-0030
October 6, 2004

1. Development of the subject property with special exception uses for a hospital, helistop and medical care facilities (outpatient only) shall substantially conform to the special exception plat dated August, 2002, revised through September 21, 2004, prepared by Urban Engineering and Associates, Inc. Approval of this application does not relieve the Applicant of complying with applicable provisions of any Zoning Ordinance, Codified Ordinance, or any other requirement.

2. The applicant shall construct Low Impact Development (LID) features such as, but not limited to, bio-retention filtration and depressed culverts within primary areas and alternate areas of the special exception plat identified for such features. The applicant shall identify the type of LID features to be constructed on the subject property as part of the initial site plan approval for the area in which such features will be located.

3. The applicant shall install an 8 foot wide asphalt multi-use trail, either within the public right-of-way or within a public access easement of up to 14 feet, on the subject property along Broadlands Boulevard as shown on the special exception plat. In the event the trail cannot be accommodated on the subject property for such purposes and at such dimensions, then the applicant shall meet the minimum requirements for a multi-purpose trail as contained in the Facilities Standards Manual. Maintenance of the trail shall be the responsibility of the applicant or Virginia Department of Transportation (if placed within the public street right-of-way).

4. The applicant shall prepare for and install a bus shelter (including a base slab and bus access lane to the public street) along the frontage of Broadlands Boulevard at a location and of a design to be determined in coordination with the Office of Transportation Services (OTS) at the time of site plan approval for the first building constructed on the property. Actual construction and installation of the base slab, shelter and related facilities shall be completed within 90 days following written notice from OTS that public bus service to the property is available. In the event the Applicant fails to complete the installation of the bus shelter within the required 90 days, then the Applicant shall pay to the County $20,000 for the purchase and installation of a bus shelter by the County, and shall provide all necessary temporary access and construction easements for County employees and their designee(s) to complete the bus shelter’s installation. The amount of the bus shelter contribution shall escalate annually from the base year of 2004 and change effective each January 1st thereafter, based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

5. The applicant shall coordinate with Loudoun County to advertise future bus transit service accessing the hospital through the use of marketing or directional information resources.

6. The vehicular entrance from the property onto Belmont Ridge Road (Route 659) as shown on the special exception plat shall be restricted for use by authorized hospital emergency vehicles only, as determined by the hospital and the County.

7. The applicant shall install along the frontage of Broadlands Boulevard, landscaping in accordance with Section 5-1414 of the Revised 1993 Zoning Ordinance supplementing the tree save areas as shown on the special exception plat.

8. The applicant shall install supplemental landscaping, including evergreen trees or shrubs, within the area of common open space owned and maintained by the Broadlands Homeowners Association located on the south side of Broadlands Boulevard (a) between Stonewheel Way and Glebe View Drive, and (b) behind those parcels identified as Lots 51, 52, 53 and 54 on the special exception plat. The type and location of such plantings shall be identified on the initial site plan approval for the proposed hospital and shall be consistent with the quantity and quality of supplemental landscaping to be provided within the tree save area along the north frontage on Broadlands Boulevard. The applicant shall not be responsible for maintenance of this supplemental landscaping. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the applicant’s requirement to provide such supplemental landscaping is contingent upon (i) approval by the association and the grant of all necessary easements required for installation and (ii) confirmation by the applicant that no existing utility or other easements would preclude such landscaping.

9. Soil waste from construction of the site shall not be stockpiled in any areas designated on the special exception plat as Tree Save Areas.

10. The applicant shall obtain certification from the National Wildlife Federation for designation of the property as a Backyard Wildlife Habitat. Within one year of issuance of the initial occupancy permit for the hospital use, the applicant shall have filed appropriate applications for such certifications.

11. The applicant shall construct the parking facilities labeled “Parking Deck (2 levels)” with the initial phase of the hospital development as shown on the south side of the hospital Main Entrance of the special exception plat.

12. The applicant shall construct the structured parking facility labeled “Future Parking Structure Phase 2” concurrent with the Phase 2 medical office building (or medical care facilities, outpatient only) as shown on the east side of the property on the special exception plat.

13. The applicant shall install automatic sprinkler, fire detection and alarm systems in accordance with applicable building codes for the hospital, powerhouse backup system and medical office buildings.

14. The parking lot and building lighting shall be designed and constructed with cut-off and fully shielded lighting fixtures so that light will be directed inward and downward toward the interior of the property, away from adjacent roads and residential areas.

a. For all lighting placed on the exterior of the building, including security lighting, there shall be a maximum average illumination over the exterior of the building of five (5) foot-candles.
b. For all parking lot lighting, there shall be a maximum average illumination over each parking lot of two (2) foot-candles.

15. Concurrent with the initial site plan approval for the proposed hospital use, the applicant shall execute an easement agreement or equivalent restriction providing that no structures or buildings that may be considered “gross floor area” (as defined in the Revised 1993 Zoning Ordinance) shall be constructed on the approximately 3.8676 acre portion of the property, identified on the special exception plat as Part 2 of Parcel 49, located north of Broadlands Boulevard and east of the existing private roadway. The applicant also shall offer to the Broadlands Homeowners Association the opportunity to establish on such parcel reasonable community-oriented uses (such as active or passive recreation facilities) and/or to install supplemental landscaping designed in coordination with the applicant; provided, however, that (a) the applicant shall retain the right to use the gross floor area available to the 3.8676 acre parcel as part of the proposed medical campus to be constructed on the balance of the property, and (b) the applicant may require, as a condition to establishing any community-oriented uses on the parcel, that the Broadlands Homeowners Association insure or indemnify the applicant and the underlying property owner for the uses of the parcel by residents. The applicant shall contribute or provide services equivalent to $30,000.00 toward such community use or landscaping.

16. In accordance with the applicable Proffer Statements of Broadlands and Broadlands South (ZCPA 1994-0005 and ZMAP 1995-0003), and Fallen Willow Farm (ZMAP 1999-0009), at the time of issuance of the first zoning permit for development of the property, the applicant shall provide a cash contribution to be deposited in the existing Route 659 Transportation Improvement Fund (TIF) and used for regional road improvements in the vicinity of the property. The actual amount of this contribution shall be determined based on 875,000 square feet of development on the property, representing Phases 1 and 2 of the applicant's proposed development, regardless of the actual square footage of Phase 1 and/or covered by the first zoning permit. All contributions in excess of the amount the applicant otherwise would be required to make under the applicable proffer statements for Phase 1 of its development shall be credited against future required contributions.

NOTE: Pursuant to proffers applicable to the property, the applicant agrees to provide a one-time contribution of $0.10 per square foot to the Volunteer Fire and Rescue Companies serving the property. The contribution shall be divided equally for fire and rescue services. The $.10 per square foot contribution will escalate annually based on the Consumer Price Index (base year of 1988) in accordance with Board policy and contributions shall be made before issuance of zoning permits for phased development of the project.

 

//Part 3 of the October 12, 2004 Planning Commission Committee meeting memo//

ATTACHMENT 2

Findings for Approval

1. The proposed uses of a hospital, associated helistop and medical care facilities are consistent with the land use policies of the Revised General Plan, which allows for institutional uses to be included in and complement Regional Office Communities.

2. Revisions to the Concept Development Plans for Fallen Willow Farm and Broadlands Office Park are consistent with the land use policies of the Revised General Plan allowing for institutional and office uses along the Dulles Greenway corridor.

3. The development proposal is consistent with policies of the Revised Countywide Transportation Plan supporting the planned transportation network in the vicinity.

4. The proposed development, subject to approval of the requested zoning ordinance modifications, conforms to the requirements of the 1972 Zoning Ordinance and Revised 1993 Zoning Ordinance.


ATTACHMENT 3

Broadlands Regional Medical Center
Application review process summary

A request was made by a Planning Commissioner to describe the application history for this project from County staff’s perspective. Leading up to the formal submission of the special exception application (SPEX 2002-0030), staff records of discussions and phone conversations cannot be confirmed with the exception of the notes from the original pre-application meeting held on August 6, 2002.

However, review of a letter from the applicant dated August 31, 2004 to the Planning Commission Vice Chair, Teresa White Whitmore, substantially recounts the evolution of the application(s) review concerning Broadlands Hospital. The activities and comments made below are in addition to the summary that was provided by the applicant.

To clearly state, a hospital use is permitted in the PD-OP (Planned Development – Office Park) zoning district of both the 1972 and revised 1993 zoning ordinances, subject to mitigation of impacts through a special exception review and approval.

Beginning with the pre-application meeting (PRAP 2002-0071), it is correct that a Zoning Conversion (ZCON) application was discussed as a solution to resolving the split zoning status of the 57.7 acre campus property (composed of Fallen Willow Farm and a portion of the Broadlands Office Park). However, staff later confirmed that a ZCON application is not available for properties outside of the Route 28 Tax District. The pre-application notes also indicated that amendments to the concept plan may be needed through a ZCPA process.

The special exception application was initially filed with the County December 5, 2003. Discussions with the applicant’s representative, Mark Looney, considered the likelihood that upon application acceptance, the Broadlands portion of the property would be converted and administered on June 16, 2003 under the Revised 1993 Zoning Ordinance instead of the 1972 Zoning Ordinance. The applicant submitted a letter dated January 29, 2003 requesting a change to Checklist review of the application. However, following this direction, the initial Certificate of Public Need (COPN) request by HCA to the State Health Commissioner was denied. The applicant chose to set aside the application review. Later in June 2003, the Board of Supervisors decided to extend administration of the 1972 Zoning Ordinance for Planned Development communities (including Broadlands). Therefore, the HCA application would be reviewed under both zoning ordinances, unless the Broadlands portion was rezoned to the Revised 1993 ordinance.

On August 5, 2003 the applicant resubmitted revised materials reflecting the ordinance status on the property, and upon Checklist review, was accepted by the County on August 27, 2003.

First referral review commenced in the Fall of 2003. The second COPN review and hearings occurred in the Fall 2003 through Winter 2004. The second COPN was approved by the State on March 10, 2004. First referrals were received in this timeframe. However, during this period, there were agreements with the applicant that certain zoning modifications would be necessary to unify the site because of the applicability of both zoning ordinances. Proposed zoning modifications were submitted to staff on January 15, 2004. Due to workload problems and the complication of the application, the Zoning referral was completed in April 2004. At this time, Zoning Administration took a formal position on the allowed uses on the property and determined that zoning concept plan amendments would be necessary to accommodate the hospital and outpatient medical facility uses.

The approved Concept Development plans for the Fallen Willow Farm and Broadlands Office Park do not identify a hospital use as a part of the original proposal. Therefore, as a part of the first referral review of the special exception, Zoning Administration concluded that amendments would be necessary to change the concept plans for Fallen Willow Farm and Broadlands Office Park. In addition, the County staff preference was to rezone (by ZMAP) the Broadlands Office Park portion to the Revised 1993 Zoning Ordinance consistent with administration of the Fallen Willow Farm approval.

However, the applicant was concerned that a new ZMAP application would result in a more open and controversial review than pursuing amendments to the existing approvals for the property. Instead, the applicant chose to file ZCPA applications (accepted on May 25, 2004) for both Fallen Willow and Broadlands under separate zoning ordinances. The applicant is permitted to do this at their own discretion, although it makes the overall administration more complicated by unifying the various requirements of the two ordinances to function for one development campus. The ZCPA applications are relatively simple themselves in that they state the uses permitted under the respective PD-OP zoning district and amend the proffer statements of Fallen Willow Farm and Broadlands to accommodate the proposal.

Staff was able to review the ZCPA applications in a limited time period because the purpose of the filing was already understood. The applications ( two ZCPAs and one SPEX) were then scheduled for the July 19, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The remainder of application activity has continued in the Planning Commission committee review.

//THE END//

 

I don't understand how anyone can object to the Attachment 1, Conditions for Approval. The conditions even include "supplemental landscaping, including evergreen trees or shrubs" on the south side of Broadlands Blvd, across from the HCA property.

Also notice item 15 concerning the 3.8 acre piece of property that HCA will offer to the HOA. Even if the HOA doesn't do anything with it, notice that the condition states "the applicant shall execute an easement agreement or equivalent restriction providing that no structures or buildings that may be considered 'gross floor area' ...shall be constructed on the approximately 3.8676 acre portion of the property."

None (zero, nada) of these conditions for approval are required, nor should we expect any, for any by-right zoning development on that same piece of property if HCA sells the property to someone else for development. That property will be developed, sooner or later, so consider what the current developer (HCA) is willing to do versus what some future developer won't have to do to build on the same property.

 

Common, you, among lots of others, know that lots of people on this forum can object to pretty much anything

 

Oh, well. Back to the potty training "community issues"...

 

Part 1 is pretty nice. What's to keep them from dumping if they get approved?

 

Dumping what?

I don't know -- I suppose the County can stop work by pulling permits or necessary construction approvals.

 

Dumping the plans. Is there a safeguard to enforce those provisions? Pulling the permits could be the way, but is it legal?

Here's an example that happens all the time. You pick XYZ Movers to move you with an oral quote. Once they get your furniture in the truck they jack the price up 200% and hold your stuff hostage until you pay.

 

GCyr thank you for posting the original document for review. It provides accurate reference for discussion. Hopefully, we can get the same type of accurate documentation from what happened with the PC ruling.

I’ve drawn out a few interesting points from this original document. What is striking is the level and magnitude of negotiated enhancements the County worked on with the applicant. This type of negotiation would not be possible if there was not a zoning variance change being requested. If a building goes on this site with no variances, these types of things are not required, and will not be part of the community.

The County has huge leverage to negotiate these types of proffers, based on the dynamic of a variance request. An office building, going in without a requested change, would not give a hoot about providing these types of amenities to the community. Nor would the County (or HOA) have leverage to get these things.

Consider this list reality only if the Hospital is approved. We will not see these things from someone building on this site with current approved zoning.

.. provide an estimated $630,000 for … improvements to Route 659

… additional landscaping on the south side of Broadlands Boulevard …

… recreation and open space for the Broadlands’ HOA use on a 3.8 acre site… applicant will contribute $30,000 towards materials or construction.

… install an 8 foot wide asphalt multi-use trail, …

…prepare for and install a bus shelter

…obtain certification from the National Wildlife Federation for designation of the property as a Backyard Wildlife Habitat.

… lighting shall be designed and constructed with cut-off and fully shielded lighting … light will be directed inward and downward toward the interior of the property, away from adjacent roads and residential areas.

There are other examples in the original document.

 

Noted extracts from the County staff recommendation for approval of the HCA application:

Staff notes …

...uses proposed do not directly generate new vehicle … greater than the allowable by-right uses already permitted on the site

Staff finds that the proposal is consistent with the Revised General Plan and applicable zoning ordinances, and supports approval of the applications …

The proposed uses of a hospital, associated helistop and medical care facilities are consistent with the land use policies of the Revised General Plan

The development proposal is consistent with policies of the Revised Countywide Transportation

To clearly state, a hospital use is permitted in the PD-OP (Planned Development – Office Park) zoning district of both the 1972 and revised 1993 zoning ordinances, subject to mitigation of impacts through a special exception review and approval.

 

GCyr…thanks for posting this…a lot of good information. And thanks to both GCyr and AFGM for shedding light on all of the amenities we will forgo in the event the BOS denies BRMC’s request for a special exception. A couple of others…the donation to Fire and Rescue, and just to say it again, the $3-4 Million in annual taxes.

There seems to be some information that the Planning Dept put together that conflicts with some of the “14 reasons” for refusal put together by the Planning Commission. The “noise” referred to in the 14 reasons is interesting…considering we’re next door to what is now the 5th busiest airport in the country with “1800-2000 flights on a typical busy weekday.”

What the folks at Loudoun Hospital fail to address is… if they are successful in their efforts to keep HCA out of Loudoun County, when can we expect Inova to build a hospital along Rt. 50? I’m sorry, I may have previously posted this, but according to what they told the HSANV, “There are only about 13 patients a day from that area now. Even with rapid population growth projected along Route 50, the Dulles and Southwest planning subareas are projected to generate only about 75 patients a day by 2020.” In addition, this area is currently served by Inova’s Fair Oaks and Fairfax hospitals.

So, are we looking at the year 2020 or beyond for a hospital along Rt. 50?

The Planning Commission’s recent decisions to go against the Planning Department’s recommendations (both the hospital and the developer proposed CPAM’s) certainly are questionable.