Monday, April 09, 2007

ND public hearing 4/9

I attended part of the P&Z hearing tonight. I found it enlightening. If I understood the exchanges correctly, of most interest to me were the following tidbits:

1) according to the town's attorney, residential is currently allowed in the interchange zone... although, presumably, additional residential would be hard to get permitted;

2) according to the town's attorney, adopting the proposed zone text change would "lower the bar" for other residential developments to be permitted;

3) I got the sense that members on both sides of the aisle were hesitant in making the zone text change to allow for the proposed residential component.

4) W/S reiterated that the viability of this development was not contingent upon the inclusion of the residential.

Well... that was my take. Anyone feel differently? What other important parts did I miss?

Finally, I caught the very end on the tube. And while I left a bit confused from all the "counting of days" by Anthony Fazzone and Patti Flynn Harris, I'm pretty sure they said that there will be more meetings on this... probably in May. Can anyone clarify that?

Also click here to see this article in the WRA (by Lauresha Xhihani) about the proposed Cheshire development. And here to see the WRA editorial on the end to the Watertown proposal from Konover.

Tim White
Town Council, 4th District

UPDATE: This anonymous update sounds correct, so felt it belonged on the front page... The public hearing was continued to 5/7. The applicant will use this meeting to answer questions raised 4/9 by the public and the commission. The commission will also likely have more questions. Up to and including 5/7 will be the last time the public can ask questions or submit anything to the commission via planning office or at the PH. After the PH is closed the commission will have 65 days to act on the application with no legal recourse to extend beyond this time frame.

47 comments:

Anonymous said...

The public hearing was continued to 5/7. The applicant will use this meeting to answer questions raised 4/9 by the public and the commission. The commission will also likely have more questions. Up to and including 5/7 will be the last time the public can ask questions or submit anything to the commission via planning office or at the PH.

After the PH is closed the commission will have 65 days to act on the application with no legal recourse to extend beyond this time frame.

Anonymous said...

Just say no to residential

Anonymous said...

What do you think is going to happen to the second parcel of land?? There are two parcels in that quad. More retail? Will w/s come back after we have softened? Somebody will. Hello people. Maybe a golf course is not a bad idea. CHESHIRE DOES NOT HAVE ONE. Environmentally friendly. The historical bridge would be preserved. Rolling hills and Pathways from the canal walk. It's adjacent to an active adult community. Low traffic. Less stress on the sewer plant, police , fire and school system. Oh yes, the turtles, fish and eagles can roam. Our high school golt team can use it. We can sled in the winter and enjoy it's beauty etc.

Anonymous said...

The PZC is flying blind on this zone change. There are huge impact considerations that have the potential to cost the town millions of dollars, but there is no time to get an impact study before by the date that the vote has to be made.

Impact studies are normally made after the developer has submitted a development plan, but that would be done after the zone change, and it would be too late. Once the zone change is done, it is a done deal for the entire 400 acres. This is a catch 22.

If they approve the zone change, it is for all 400 acres of this zone and no one has a clue as to how bad the development can get with box stores. Queen St or worse.

The only reasonable action is for the PZC to turn down the text change and tell W/S that if they want to resume that they have to perform an impact study before a text change is considered again.

The other reasonable action is to make no change to the zone. This might give the owners incentive to find a developer that conforms to the current zoning.

Cheshire should go slow. We will have to live with the result forever and it has a lot of potential to be bad. Remember the pool? Let's be sure of this.

Watertown asked Konovan for an impact study before any zone change and they pulled out probably because it would have shown too many negatives for the town.

Anonymous said...

A golf course would yield very little in the way of ratables.

Monday night's hearing was a lesson in self interest and outright stupidity. You had Westfield, which keeps up this phony posture of concern for the town of Cheshire. It's all about them not having to compete with somebody other shopping center.

Then we move to all the people who live in the North End, who talk about the impact the lifestyle center would have. Yes there would be an impact, but there would also be a similar impact (especially traffic) if there were an office building or a decent size industrial faclity there. Anyone who has lived near a corporate complex can tell you about the traffic woes (some even need to bring in cops to direct traffic). An industrial complex would bring truck traffic.

Then you had the former Town Council Candidate Matthew Jaliewag (I'm not sure of the spelling of the last name) who can't tell the difference between a big box store and a shopping center. The Lowes' store that he's takling about in Wallingford includes no other retailers.

And when did Derf Kleist become an expert on fire safety? To hear him tlak like he was some kind of an expert was insane.

Folks, what these people want is no change at all. While that might be fine in a perfect world where expenses don't increase every year, it doesn't work in modern day Connecticut. Manufacturing in Connecticut is in decline. Corporate relocations into Connecticut are few and far between; you're seeing more leaving the state -Goodbye, Bayer - then you're seeing move in.

An outright rejection of what W/S is proposing could have long term negative consequences. Business people will look at that kind of action and see it as a sign that the town has gone back to its old ways. And it will be another 20 years before we see another proposal that will help take the tax burden off of the middle class.

People who really care for the town's long term vitality need to find a way to make this work. if that means elimnating the housing component from the W/S project, so be it.

But the people seeling the idea that this kind of development will hurt property values are wrong. What WILL hurt property values is lots of homes being put up for sale because people can't afford to live here anymore.

Anonymous said...

A golf course? For the high school team? We can't get $800k for turf, we should spend $5,000,000 on a course, I think you should talk to Derf about fire saftey there.

Anonymous said...

All I hear is how this will increase our tax base. WRONG! If you include residential its a definite loss. If you include costs for infrastructure - fire, police, sewers it is also a loss. Cheshire should not OK anything until a study is done FIRST. To let this go forward without those studies is stupidity at its finest.

Anonymous said...

But the people seeling the idea that this kind of development will hurt property values are wrong.

It will hurt property values big time. It's location, location.
When you change the image and that's what the conversion of route 10 to Queen St then the property values will come closer together. And, with all the added traffic route 10 will be even more congested than it normally is.


Malls have 10 times as much traffic as manufacturing or office buildings. People go to work and many stay there all day until the end of their day. With malls, people are arriving and leaving all day and into the night.

Who is giving you your information?????????

Anonymous said...

Anons 12:56 and 4:27 -

But if you don't include residential in the mix, then it WILL increase our tax base. W/S has said it doesn't absolutely have to have residential in the mix and my guess is that PZC will find some way to get it removed or not give the developer the necessary approvals.

The idea that the retail component will turn the area into Queen Street is just fear mongering. What makes Queen Street distasteful is the collective aggregation of retail and you can't guarantee that level of retail development will follow the W/S Project into Cheshire.
Anyone who says malls have 10 times as much traffic as industrial or office developments has never really experienced having a corporate facility in their backyards. I lived in New Jersey for a while before coming to CT and I know the kind of traffic you get from a corporate facility or an industrial building.
I'm not saying a mall doesn't create any traffic, but in the case of any development, any traffic planner will tell you that the key is where the traffic is coming from. Unless most of people going to the lifestyle center are coimng up Route 10, the problem will likely be limited to Route 10 right at the off ramp for 691. People from Southington, Wolcott and Wallingford and other neighboring communities are not going to travel on Peck Lane and other Cheshire backroads. And people coming from outside the immediate area are going to take 691 right to the door step of the center.
To suggest otherwise is fear mongering by people who have their own agendas.

Anonymous said...

Let's look at this:

Golf Course: Needs a huge banquet facility to pay its way. A mile from AquaTurf? Not

Manufacturing: All going to Chunching and Chinnoy, not Cheshire.

Office Park: It's been 20 years since 691 opened and hasn't happened. Any explanations?

I don't want residential. Besides that, I have an open mind to high end retail/services

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:42 If people have questions or concerns it does not automatically mean that they are against something. The public meeting is the forum where the citizens can and should ask as many questions as possible. I sat next to a women that I never met before and when someone mentioned "you should not fear change" she loudly said "I'm not afraid of change". She was elderly but up to date in her convictions. I never asked or got an indication of her feelings on this propsal. She never ask me. She said that "she learned a lot by attending". Great job by the P&Z people. The meeting was well run and great questions were answered. I can't and will not ever deny any citizen the right to ask their questions. I left the meeting feeling more informed and hope that the board can make the right decision.

South End said...

The proposal from W/S is as generic as they come. As Canton learned, what you finally get may be vastly different than your initial expectations. I am hoping that those with such a complete and blind trust in W/S, such as anon 10;42, don't actually sit on the P&Z Commission. As it stands now, approving this change is a GIANT leap of faith. And truth be told, I am in favor of retail development. Residential however, would be a BIG mistake.

Anonymous said...

Tim, My take on your item #1 is slightly different than yours. From what I know, the residential that existed PRIOR to the present plan of development was grandfathered in. That is currently the only residential in the IC zone. Anyone can PETITION to have residential built in an industrial zone by requesting a zone change (as with the case of the 300 unit (not 200) apartment building proposed for East Johnson Ave around 1995.) And, of course, if they want affordable housing then the state gets involved. Traditionally, if a town votes to keep affordable housing out of an industrial zone, it is up to the applicant to prove his case that it should be allowed, that is, the burden of proof is on the developer. The state recognizes the value to a town of industrial land and also the inherent problems putting residential in an industrial zone, both to the residents who will tire of the noise and truck traffic (ie, Dalton) and to the marketability of future industrial projects as business owners do not want to build there and put up with neighbors' complaints. If it is zoned residential or mixed, then the burden of proof as to why it should NOT be allowed falls onto the town and the town must defend its position. The state, naturally, looks favorably on affordable housing and bends over backwards to accomodate builders who are willing to build it. Incentives to build affordable housing include allowing a more dense development than local zoning regs allow in order for the builder to put in more units and recoup some loss he may have incurred by putting in smaller, more affordable homes. The town stands its best chance of maintaining LOCAL control of land that is zoned industrial, not residential or mixed. Of course, nothing is ever carved in stone anymore, just ask the people of New London, but if this zone text change goes through, we definitely weaken our position regarding allowing residential, esp. affordable housing, in the other quadrants.
As far as last night's meeting, I have always been opposed to the residential component--it will be a tax loss to the town--but was ambivilent about the retail until last night's meeting. Hearing some of the horror stories from the carpenter union representative and the people from Canton along with the sewer issue has convinced me that this whole project is not a good idea. At the very least, the P&Z needs to have an impact study done BEFORE any zone text change is done. To do otherwise would be irresponsible.

Anonymous said...

anon 8:24 Great comment. My feelings were exactly the same after the meeting. Also, the person from South Windsor was very informative. I hope all the P&Z members read this. After reading some of the previous comments this is very refreshing.
Can P&Z request the impact study before a decision to change the text is made? This was not made clear last night.

Anonymous said...

9:57 This question was actually asked by Mr.Slocum. He asked first if the applicant would submit to such a conditioned approval. The applicant said essentially that WS would not at the front end but after the zone text was approved the applicant would with a site plan/project application.

Atty. Fazzone followed by stating that an applicant by state statute could not be required to do so.

The town attorney confirmed at some length that a planning commission could not make a zone text change approval conditioned on an fiscal impact study to be provided by an applicant.

Tim White said...

I don't know the relevant timing details of an impact study for the W/S deal here. But that was why the Konover deal in Watertown evaporated.

Anonymous said...

If an impact study is not done prior to the zone change then this project should not be approved. If WS Dev. knew they were going to come out smelling like a rose they would have no problem. The thing is they know this study would put them in a bad light and they want no part of it. Once the zone text goes through the town has no recourse but to give them everything they want. Cheshire P&Z beware!

Anonymous said...

If they exclude housing it is still a huge problem. The town will have shown that it is willing to change the usage. All the owners now have to do is go to court and say, they changed it for one use they should be able to change it for housing or affordable housing. I would bet on the developers.

Reject this change request in total. Keep Cheshire residential, keep the value of our property, keep it green and a wonderful place to live. We don't need big box stores all the way down route 10.

Take back our town from the developers.

Don't let them sell our school system for a big profit and leave the taxpayers the education bill.

Look at Woodbridge, they would never let this crap in.

Anonymous said...

Hey, Stop:

Maybe you weren't at the hearing on Monday, but according to what the attorneys at the meeting said, any developer that wants to build residential can walk in tomorrow and successfully argue that the town should be able to allow residential because the permitted projects in the Interchange Zone are strictly limitted to indistrial uses.

Using your faulty logic, the current PZC (and all future ones) would have to reject all development proposals to guard against the threat of residential development.
Cheshire is a wonderful place to live, but unless we start seeing some ratables, you won't be able to stick around and enjoy it because taxes will be too high.

The reason there aren't any large retail developments in Woodbridge is the same reason you won't see retail in Cheshire beyond the areas immediately next to the interchange: Insufficient traffic counts to support retail. Except for the area adjacent to the Wilbur Cross Parkway, Woodbridge is call backroads. And inspite of all the complaints about Route 10, the non-rush hour level of traffic isn't enough to support large amounts of retail.

The level of fear-mongering on this blog is incredible. Some of you are the same people who said that building the new Stop and Shop would be the end of Cheshire as we know. Guess what? It wasn't.

Anonymous said...

I was at the same meeting and got an entirely different take on the residential. I understood the lawyer to say that once we CHANGE the zoning we are opening ourselves up to any residential in this area.

Anonymous said...

1:38 I think your recollection is correct. New residential in industrial is not permitted. The potential for a development under the affordable housing act does exist because of confusing language in that statute. But even a developer would have to be prepared to have their day in court and quite likely be taking only even odds of success. I don't think that's a fight they really want to start end up with. The easier approach is get PZC to make the mixed use change their asking for and then the pinic blanket is all theirs to swarm over.

Anonymous said...

1:38 is correct. 1:03 got it wrong.

Anonymous said...

Re-read what was said at 1:03 before you start congratulating yourselves.
What the attorneys said was that because the Interchange Zone wasn't zoned strictly residential - the zone allows for hotels office, etc. in addition to industrial - a developer could come in right now and probably convince the state's high courts to force the town to allow residential.

Anonymous said...

5:56PM Hotels and office is not residential. Residential is homes, apartments, condos. That's the reason the developer is asking for a zone text change. If it was already allowed he would just submit plans for approval. He needs this text change first.

Anonymous said...

I think many of us are missing the point. The land is owned by 3-4 of the private devolopers that live in Cheshre/Southington. As a group they have refused to sell the property over the years because they want to see specific development that will enhance their interests; home building, real estate sales etc. The Gang of Four as I will call them have banded together to hold firm on their position of selling to a developer that will develop to the Gang of Four0 needs & desires. In fairness do not blame the Town Council or the Town for an inability to develop this piece of property. The State law allows any developer to build low income housing anywhere in the State as they see fit. This property could easily go to low income housing, but the Gang of Four have stipulations in the sales contract that do not allow this. The reason is they do not want to be blamed for bringing in the unwanteds of the world into Cheshire. Now to clarify this statement; any farmer in Town that wants to sell his property to a developer for low income housing can do so and there is notjing anyone or the Town can do about it. So think about this, 50 acres or so, low income housing apartmenst allowed under State statute that could house 300-500 families with 2-3 kids each. How will the Town handle this, react to this and pay for 500 to 1000 more kids in the school system that are predominately innner city kids. What will the educrats do, how goods will our school system be with 20% of our school population non-white, what about property values now? This is coming.

Anonymous said...

In the sales contract? I'm confused. If a sales contract can allow anything to be built then why are they asking for text change? The gang has no more cheap residential land to build on? They need ind/comm . It's cheaper and they can build more condos. Thank you Betty Ives and people like her... The 55 and over market is saturated. New concept" MIXED USE". Great in the center of town but not next to a shopping (whatever they call it). Think of all the complaints. The comment someone made about malls being outdated. It cost less to build two strips facing each other than placing a roof over it. No heat, electricity etc. How foolish do you think people are? We have to look no futher than the POOL. I would like to hear more..

Anonymous said...

anon 8:00 I will be moving if this happens. I feel sorry for those that are left...

Anonymous said...

if that is the alternative we'd be better off getting the whole area developed asap with whatever crappy commercial development they can put down so it won't be able to be used for multifamily residential

Anonymous said...

10:27 The only problem is their asking for a zone text change. When that happens we no longer can control what type of development is put there. Also another thought whats to stop this developer from getting the zone text change and then backing out. The area is already approved for residential and it can be turned into condo (apartment) city. We know this land is owned by locals who would love nothing more than to make a fortune off of housing.

Anonymous said...

Who thought of this law, and passed it, to place towns in a situation where they must put the cart before the horse. Any business decisions made this way would surely be doomed to failure. No one would approve something without knowing the implications first. The P&Z should reject this because it would not be a sound decision for the town and its citizens. Its the equivalent of buying a car sight unseen. Sounds silly doesn't it? Even if you buy something it can be returned if your not satisfied -not so the town, we buy this text change were stuck with it. Everybody needs to understand this before any decisions are made.

Anonymous said...

After reading the editorial in The Cheshire Herald today. I have one question. Why do they feel that W/S Development of Chestnut Hill Ma. and Westfield Corp. are different? Both have hired guns. Both are looking out for their own interests and not Cheshire. Let's be fair. W/S has been put their dog & pony show on for 4 groups in town plus a 5th that I'm aware of. We the citizens or (special interest group) as the editor referenced are trying to educate the people. The herald has not had one article to explain in detail this proposed text change. The only thing you have done is report on the meetings. Many people in this town still don't know what is going on.This is Cheshire's most important decision. Please write some informational articles before it to late. Let's be fair to all the citizens of Cheshire...

Anonymous said...

re: editorial position of the Herald.
The paper is covering the story.

Of more concern to me is the complete lack of any concern expressed in their editorials regarding the potential negative impacts this project may have on our town. Their editorials lack a reporter's inquiring approach. Who knows what agenda they have...they won't see many ad revenues...it must be change for the sake of change.

Their Pollyanna puff pieces are becoming ridiculous. We should all hold hands, etc. makes me want to vomit.

Positive attitudes about change are just fine but the town's so-called special interest group - its citizens - has an obligation to be concerned about this very substantial change. The paper should embrace this approach.

Anonymous said...

Gee the Herald supports the idea that we should CONSIDER change and all the old timers in town have a fit-they are the ones with an agenda of no growth, starve the school system, bitch about more unfunded mandates and then when there is no money coming into the town via the state they have no answers other then just say no. No vision no answers just say no. Maybe you can run on that next Dave and see how far that gets you.

Anonymous said...

Watch the telecast of the P&Z meeting. There were many young people, with children who were not in favor of this proposal. Also those who spoke against were in the vast majority. So get rid of the old timer comments and get your facts straight. As far as the Herald is concerned they can support anything they want but as the only town paper they should also bring out the other side of the story. Schrumm is one of nine council members he alone cannot change policy - so give it a break!

Anonymous said...

ERRT-you can move to the old folks home ol timer
Get out of the way there is a new dog in town
Called W/S and they are gonna sell ya something ya need!!!!!!!!
Gong-ya take ya farms and ya cows and move to new Hampshire!!
Biff-shops and blacktop and all the good stuff
Slap-bif and bang-move to the hills

Anonymous said...

I refuse to stoop to your level with a response. Good luck!

Anonymous said...

anon 12:10 You must be old . You have not heard anything that has been said. Maybe you have selective hearing?. W/S has lied to Cheshire twice... One - in the first presentation to TC. when asked if they had any drawings the answer was NO. They did (front page of MRJ). Two - their great reputation, the carpenters union rep's info on their labor practices leaves much to be desired. Toward the end of the 4/9 meeting their impatience showed. They were pushing their weight around. We need an answer- time line (65days)??? What will happen later? Same as Canton? What if we don't have all the info to make a decision? P&Z should say NO. W/S can prospose the changes again. Why should Cheshire be forced to go by their time table? No thanks. We can find better than the W/S proposal...

Anonymous said...

hey calling all coots calling all coots
Change is on the horizon and it is the good old american way of madking a buck
Get ready for some competition
GEt ready for the stores
Brace yourself-it looks like a crash landing for you!!
Be true to your american ways
Let the business of america be business
Lets go for the big big change
And help out a great economy

Anonymous said...

To the detriment of Cheshire. Great. Sounds like the only thing you care about is your pockets. Why did no one want the LOEWES in that area? Too much competition? It's only the start. Let the games begin....

Anonymous said...

1:26 PM
So you are attributing old age to intelligent and thoughtful consideration of an important change in the town's planning process. Does this suggest that you are some impatient impudent child who simply gets what he wants by rants at older adults? Rumor has it those brats are usually unhappy with everything they get anyway.

Why on earth is anybody cheering the the coming of some stores like its the second coming. I would probabbly understand this enthusiasm better if Disney had an option on this property but you're getting all whipped up into an excited frenzy over Kohl's. What a macho guy. Picking on the old coots so you can shop upscale. You probably haven't changed your underwear this week either.
God help us.

Anonymous said...

anon 5:48 Unlike some, this was an intelligent observation!!! Also, he or she should be put in timeout until after this decision is made....

Anonymous said...

Crashing and dashing
Up your alley and coming soon to a north end near you
the lifestyle center
Go man go

Anonymous said...

10:40 Are you for real? Glad I live at the south end. You must live at the north end. Crashing and dashing? Only up your end.

Anonymous said...

When we have to hear from children like 10:40PM I really think there should be an age restriction on commenters to this blog.

Anonymous said...

Bold and original
coming soon to a north end near you
W/s and the gang
do it man do it

Sorry old timer
time to move to that home in Arizona
Where they have lots of lifestyle centers like this

Anonymous said...

Bold and original, that's a laugh.
When has stores with lots of black top and a big parking lot been bold and original. Maybe where you come from.

Anonymous said...

At this first P&Z meeting a few parents got up and said how they thought this would be a good place for their children to spend time. I found this very interesting since I have on occasion had to visit Meriden Square on a Friday night. Let me tell these parents this is the last place you want your children to "hang out". And if you think the characters that hang out at the Square now aren't going to come to Cheshire, think again. As one resident from Canton said in a letter to the P&Z the police blotter is full of calls from their WS Development.