Questions for ND
Remember… this Monday, March 12, the P&Z will be meeting in town hall to hold a public hearing on the proposal for the northend. I hope you can make it and be heard… although I suspect that not everyone will be able to speak on Monday.
But since we now have this blog, I thought we could try to use it to get to the heart of the concerns of most people. And while some of the northend comments haven’t exactly “elevated the dialogue,” there have been numerous questions asked here… questions which I’ve been hearing from lots of people around town. So I’ve tried to assemble the questions in this post. And please forgive me if they’re a bit convoluted. May of these questions are contingent upon other questions… blah, blah, blah. But I do think the following questions cover many of the concerns (including my own) that I’ve heard voiced. (As well, I've tried to answer questions of which I'm fairly certain of the answer. But don't quote me. I'm not the expert. I'm just trying to add a bit.) So here goes…
1) Are Cheshire’s interchange zone and Cheshire’s land which is zoned industrial a mirror image of each other? No
2) Can we see maps of the two different areas? Town hall has them, but I don't.
3) In what way will this proposal affect the industrial zoned areas that are outside the interchange zone?
4) Will residential areas now be allowed anywhere with industrial-zoned areas? (Often mentioned is the area from Creamery Road north to the interchange zone)
5) If residential would then be allowed in either zone, would it then be possible that P&Z rejects a residential proposal which is then overturned in court?
6) Could this happen now?
7) Is this, in effect, a “lowering of the bar” for developers to build houses?
8) What is a “special district zone?”
9) Is it possible to affect only the part of the interchange zone which is included in this proposal?
10) How many different votes must be taken for this development to be built? eight, I think.
11) Which vote is the most significant? everyone seems to say it's the vote that would follow next Monday's meeting.
12) How would this proposal affect traffic?
13) If this proposal was shelved and a manufacturing offered to develop the land, how would a manufacturing plant affect traffic?
14) With regard to affordable housing statutes, does this proposal have an effect?
15) This developer has not done shopping complexes with a residential component. Why is the residential portion being considered in Cheshire?
16) Is the viability of the retail part contingent on the inclusion of the residential part? No
17) Are 150-200 condos being considered for development on West Main? If so, with respect to the schools, how many kids are anticipated to live there?
18) What affect will the WPCA have on this proposal?
19) The Blue Back development had a requirement that the developer place some money in escrow for unanticipated problems (e.g. traffic). Could we do something similar? I asked Town Hall and was told that this could be considered, but would probably not be necessary with this proposal.
20) Could Chehire implement a land-use tool called “transfer of development rights,” or TDR? (A TDR works like this: A community designates an area it wants to protect - usually farms or forests - and an area where it wants development. Landowners in the protected area are given development credits, which they can sell to developers, investors or the community itself. In return for selling the credits, the landowner in the preservation area agrees to place a conservation easement on the land. Meanwhile, the buyer of the credits can develop at a higher density than otherwise allowed on the property designated for development. So, in effect, a private investor has paid for development rights to keep a farm or forest from being developed.)
21) Will tax revenues exceed the cost of services? By services, consider:
a) operational costs for sewers
b) capital costs for sewer plant upgrade, including possible pumping station
c) widening of roads (avoiding traffic congestion)
d) maintenance of roads
e) installing of stoplights
f) electric bill for stoplights
g) cost of increased staffing for police
h) cost of increased staffing for fire
i) cost to build new northend fire station
j) cost of additional teachers for kids in schools
k) etc.
22) Will these issues be addressed in an impact study?
23) When can we expect the impact study be completed?
24) Will this development be energy-independent? (Ok... I admit it... I just thought of that one and couldn't resist!)
Did I miss any key questions/concerns? If so, please add them in the comments section.
And while this is not directly related, the WRA ran this article on the resistance being given to Konover with their proposal to build a $64 million retail complex (by Jonathan Shugarts) on 119 acres near Route 8.
Tim White
Town Council, 4th District
14 comments:
Tim, nice job. thanks.
Here is a question: How do we keep the residential component from being a future money pit for the town.
Plenty of "luxury apartment" complexes turn into havens of struggling single moms a decade or two later
Why? Well, it's hard to control the marketplace and hard to prevent a landlord from "milking" the complex by not reinvesting into keeping the place at the top-end.
And under the fair housing laws, only a senior development can bar children
Advertise only to single or unmmarried "yuppies"? First, this might be deemed illegal "steering" under the Fair Housing Act; secondly effort to limit the number of unit occupants have been the subject of court challenges from ethnic ambulance
chasers
Finally, the "yuppie" argument does not fly since a landlord must under CT law accept Section 8 tenants http://www.nmhc.org/Content/ServeContent.cfm?IssueID=155&ContentItemID=1285&siteArea=Topics
Unless the residential component of the NED are very expensive and very small owner occupied condomiumiums, or conversely , senior housing, we are going to unleash a time bomb on the Cheshire school system and gain very little offsetting tax base.
Perhaps we should be charitable to our less fortunate neighbors and allow this to be developed for affrordable housing. Unlike my chagrin to find I elected a spendthrift governor, I'd prefer we conciously decide to perform such a good work, instead of pretending we weren't and being shocked later
Tim
If you add up all the school aged childeren that come from our current condo complexes is the not the number way way smaller than everyone thinks> I heard the number was less than 30. If that is true than all this scare talk of tons of new students does not have any basis in fact.
6:33 you're not alone. i've heard those same concerns voiced by others.
9:15 when the northend development project first came up, I asked for that number, but have not gotten one yet. I was told that it would be addressed via the developer-sponspored impact study. Personally, I think the town should do this... count the number of one or two bedroom neighborhoods in Cheshire, then ask the schools to cross reference that number with student addresses. (no confidential info needs to leave the schools... just a total number was my request). Anyway... I was told that will be answered via an impact study.
Beyond that, I have no expertise in this. I can only speak anecdotally. And to that end, there are students in Cheshire condos (I don't know which condos are one or two bedrooms), and within those condos... not every unit has a kid. How do I know? Knocking on doors... but I have no factual data... just my own experience.
(while I know of one two-bedroom house in my own neighborhood, I'm assuming that most of Cheshire's houses are three bedrooms or more. But that is an assumption on my part.)
Tim...we have an apple v. orange issue here.
The NED folks now want rental apartments. Comparing that to owner-occupied condominiums is very inaccurate. Those units are owned primarily by pre-parental couples or older empty nesters. Relatively few are rented out, and many of these are done on a "friends and family" basis.
I really think building a couple of hundred rental units two off ramps from Waterbury or Meriden will cause a great deal of migration from those communities.
I saw numbers that said 85 students come from Currier Woods alone.
Regardless, according to one study I read, Cheshire has 17000 acres of residential and less than 1000 acres of industrial/commericial. Why would anyone not think that is a more than fair balance? There are plenty of residential units here in town. There is very little land left for commericial/industrial/retail. Why give any more of that valuable land away to residential uses?
BTW, the meeting is Monday, the 12th, not the 13th and don't forget to change your clock ahead tonight or you will be late to it, too!!
Nothing has bothers me more in this debate than the people in Cheshire who look down on people from other towns.
"I really think building a couple of hundred rental units two off ramps from Waterbury or Meriden will cause a great deal of migration from those communities."
Who ever wrote that is a jerk and I am very sorry to say someone who live in our town. I am glad living here has made you a better person that people from thos communities. I hope the whole north end is filled with low income housing and your worst nightmare comes true.
85 students from currier woods in not accurate. It is less.
1:06 said "The NED folks now want rental apartments. Comparing that to owner-occupied condominiums is very inaccurate."
good point. sorry. Didn't mean to mislead anyone. I just completely forgot to consider that.
anon 2;52 c'mon Mr. Bisbort, you can post that sort of mean spirited socialism under your own name here
Is this meeting on the 12th going to be televised live?
9:15 People are not using scare tactics. The possibility of a large influx of students is real, especially when you consider that what they are now talking about is only 1/4 of the interchange zone. You can be sure that the other 3/4 will be developed and these could have affordable housing which means you can put a lot more houses up.
You can't use existing housing to give you an estimate, especially if it is not relatively new construction. In older condos, kids have grown and there is a much high incidence of adults only.
The new construction will attract families from surrounding towns who want their kids to go to Cheshire's good school system. After the kids are educated, it's time to move to a lower cost town.
Post a Comment