CTP comments on proposed ND
Regarding the proposed ND, there's an interesting exchange on PZC "process" over at the Cheshire Town Post. Basically it appears to be an exchange between Craig Houghton and Marty Coburn (though I haven't telephoned either to confirm... and it could very easily be anyone posting the comments... so take the comments with a grain of salt).
Tim White
10 comments:
Regardless of what Mr. Coburn says, this draft, purposely portraying the applicant in the positive, is so biased as to intimidate the other commissioners. There is no legal reason for writing it in a manner that shows the applicant met the criteria. Some previous attorney said to write it that way? What did our current attorney say, but how could he say very much if he is not at these hearings.
It seems that the only reasonable way to serve the residents of Cheshire would have been to produce a draft with each of the 20or so criteria and after each would be a listing of both the pros and the cons, but to have it all pros makes no sense. All the cons were swept away? Just think if we ran our courts that way. Give the jury comments from one side? What was the name of the attorney that came up with this method? Was it John Knott?
As for Marty not meeting with the applicant, it certainly looks like the applicant's voice is loud and clear, so did staff help with that? Did the applicant or their agents have access to any of the staff after the meeting was closed to the public?
It's a good thing this was leaked. The P&Z process should definitely be reviewed and corrected.
I can see why Craig Houghton had the reaction that he did and we should all thank him for providing a great service to the people of Cheshire.
And a special thanks to the person or persons that leaked this information. We need more leaks.
Just a few comments on Mr Cobern's Findings for now. Many more to come.
e) The sewer plant does not have the capacity to support this development. The town engineer stated that with storms caused inflows the input doe3s exceed capacity. It's O'K to run over capacity and dump raw sewage into the Quinnipiac? So what if more sewage is dumped in? What does DEP say about this?
There are numerous people in Cheshire who have wanted to connect, but still have not been allowed to do so.
The hunt for sump pumps will be restarted inorder to enable the mall?
f) There is no safety concern building a sprawling complex with no nearby firehouse. A fire house has to be built, but will it be done before the mall and where are they going to find volunteers that can get to the complex from the places of employ in the south with traffic over 100% capacity. How can ambulance service respond quickly with the traffic problem?
The police chief estimate 5 more officers. When something goes wrong, how are other officers going to respond with the traffic congestion?
W/S says they will provide on-site security during operating hous. What happens during the rest of the time.
W/S they will dicuss the level of their security with the police chief during the application phase.
It seems the rule is that a condition will always be addressed in the next phase. This should stop. This commission is voting on things inspite of the unknown.
Add your comments.
It seems like Mr. Cobern is backpedaling all the way to the big pond. He even presented a so called solution to the entrance {traffic) problem for the applicant. They didn't own some of the land, oops. What was that all about? He doesn't know all the laws. Why didn't our attorney write this very important
(DRAFT) decision?
After watching Mr. Coburn it has become clear he is so in favor of this he could not see any detrimental issues if they were explained to him in a one on one conversation and given a video tape to replay. His sorry attempt to propose a traffic solution shows his level of inadequacy. His job is to listen, not to propose solutions. He should remove himself.
I wonder how he is going to vote? According to our Town Planner " you can't ask that of the developer or you can't have them do that". This proposal is so one sided that if it passes they can do whatever they want there except have a gas station (maybe). We the public have been had.
CH This is his explanation but who's to say it's right?
COMMENTS ON MARTY COBERN'S FINDINGS.
In my opinion, this document does not meet the standard that the people of Cheshire expect.
Q. Any residential unit will be beneficial to the Town of Cheshire....
Marty's take, "The plan to provide townhouses addresses a type of residential property that is not in great supply in Cheshire..."
We have a hundred or more of houses in Cheshire that are for sale and some are in foreclosure. The housing market is still in a downturn, prices are falling and nobody has any idea when it will recover. Banks have tighten their requirements and will not be granting easy, no money down, variable rate mortgages. We maybe not far from a reccession I'm sure Marty knows that.
On January 16, the town lawyer stated clearly that the commission can not determine what type of housing the developer must build and although they say condominiums now, they can put up rentals instead and go back to their plan of 160 rental units. With the current market and even when it improves, they could never get anywhere close to $320,000 for condominiums.(Note 1) And, what empty nester would want to buy in a non-age restricted high density complex.
The will be building apts so that parents who want their children in a good school system can move easily to Cheshire, no mortgage application, no points, no high down payment, just a security deposit and your in until your kids graduate. They'll be selling the school system at a profit.
Mary has no idea of the type of housing they will finally decide on,so how can he say, it addresses a Cheshire need.
Note 1: The impact assessment uses $320,000 per unit to calculate property tax revenue.
Read Marty's Findings and post you comments
Click here to view the APPROVAL.
Jumping to Marty Coberns defense is an unnatural act for me but the PZC drafts decisions in the positive even if it votes the application down. Marty relishes taking the unmamed position of chairman ergo ownership of many of the town's big PZC decisions despite the fact that his vote is only one of nine...its an ego thing.
Cobern wishing to keep the commission on track (time is running out) laid out a blueprint based on the application. The commission in effect was debating bits and pieces of it but they were doing it with their own questions. Ultimately these people have to vote. The town may be sued. Their vote will stand or fall on their findings.
Despite his pompous tone Marty is doing this right.
The citizens of this Town still have no idea of what is going on. Look at Durham 500 people showed up to oppose an 11 acre development with a Price Chopper and a couple of other retail stores. This is proposed on 11 acres of land. One irony of this is that traffic was a big issue (what a surprise). The projected figure of 3000 more trips(does that number sound familiar)? Did they use the same consultant? 101 acres vs 11 acres but the same number. Our proposal has 90 more acres and 500,000 sq ft more of buildings and residential. I guess the Durham Price Chopper will get more business than our Organic grocer. People wake up especially our P&Z commisioners.
Cobern wishing to keep the commission on track (time is running out) laid out a blueprint
This is far from a blueprint. Marty is a very skilled communicator and has written his Findings as if they were a true representation of the proposal. His wording has the real possibility of unduly influencing other members. What is disturbing is that he has left out all the facts and thoughts that do not support this proposal.
FULL DISCUSSION
There should be a full discussion of all 20 item, looking at all items from all sides and points of view and seriously questioning the facts supplied by the developer or their agents.
INSURE NO RESIDENTIAL WITHOUT THE RETAIL
They should stipulate that the residential cannot be built without the retail actually being built, just in case W/S decides to postpone or abandon the retail portion, and if the retail is postponed then the residential has to be postponed.
EXPIRATION DATE REQUIRED
They should also stipulate that the the approval requires that construction start by a certain date and that it is completed by a certain date.
If the dates are not met then the zone change expires.
The above have to be done to protect the citizens of Cheshire and if not done, then it is a disservice to the people who they a responsible to.
Post a Comment