Tonight's PZC meeting on the northend development
The Planning and Zoning Commission met tonight. They held a public hearing regarding the extension of the northend development plan to ten years.
Here are a few random comments from PZC member Patti Flynn Harris:
If you're interested to learn more, all four papers were at tonight's meeting. So I'm sure it'll be in the local press tomorrow, if not tonight.
Tim White
13 comments:
Is it appropriate to record a public hearing without the knowledge of those present? And is it appropriate to publish only part of the hearing without the rest of the comments, if ,in fact, it is appropriate at all?
3:27
What are you worried about? It was a "Public" Hearing.
I am more concerned about the 146condos they are looking to build. What are we doing??
We allow the developers to dictate to us.
Didn't we give them a fair amount of time to begin the development?Marty Cobern is quoted as saying it "isn’t like putting in a 20-unit subdivision". No kidding!!
They blame the poor economy for the slow down, oh well, then you lost your chance.
Why allow this group to control us?
Wake up PZC, this really isn't what is best for this town.
How many pharmacies and package storses will be included in the W/S?
"How many pharmacies and package storses will be included in the W/S?"
As of right now, there are none, so you do not have to worry
7:43
Key words are "as of this moment".
I guarantee you that when they throw up 146 condos in that end of the town, you will see package stores and pharmacies in there so they can get "medicated".
Just because they aren't listed now, they will be there.
If you build it, they will come.
what is your fixation with medication? are you in the pharmaceutical business or what??
A dog never smells its own.
"They blame the poor economy for the slow down, oh well, then you lost your chance.
Why allow this group to control us?"
Where there's control there's always a conflict of interest. Time will tell soon enough.
"How many pharmacies and package storses will be included in the W/S?"
1 pharmacy and 1 package store have inquired about leasing space in W/S. I believe Rite Aid gave up waiting for the project and built on W. Main street.
In the end it's a non-event. Only the crybabies in town will argue about traffic concerns but in reality there will be little, if any, impact on traffic on Rte. 10 in the heart of Cheshire. Nobody seems to cry when 146 go homes go up throughout Cheshire but break out the tissue boxes when 146 condos may be built practically on 691 out of the town's way.
Unfortunately, it's the same crybabies that crave attention when they want their taxes lowered but will oppose the much needed commercial development to help off-set property taxes.
What people are not being honest about is the real reasons why they don't want this project to move forward. I believe these people are afraid of increased low-income housing families moving into the area and "ruining" Rte. 10 and hence Cheshire. What I don't understand is (if this is true) how could low-income housing increase because of this development? Is it even true or are these crybabies just making it up?
The only town that has ever been able to limit retail sprawl once stores were built is Glastonburt.....right where you cross the bridge and get off Rt 3.
The WS model is to overwhelm major intersections with retail......and they LOVE interchanges like the Rt 10/691 location.
Go to their website and look at their locations and how they advertise for tenants. They brag about how many thousands of cars come to their locations (and surrounding boxstores) that ALWAYS come to these sites.
The proponents deny that the north end of town....and eventually all the way down Rt 10 to Creamery Rd.... will become Queen Street. But they are wrong......P&Z will not be able to stop the slow creep of this commercialization. Remember some of the old "families" in town still own property up and down Rt 10 and some of their friends and relatives are ON P&Z so they might have no objections to allow whatever the developers want.
As for residential......the extreme north end of town is the wrong place for ANY residential. It is the opposite of smart growth. You don't put people as far from town services as you can and then hope that the cost of town services can be held down. It is simply bad planning......and what kind of apartments are you going to get in an area that is obviously becoming commercialized?
Have you ever visited Mix Ave above Hamden's "Magic Mile"?
No thanks.
Thank you 3:07 you hit the nail on the racist head.
did you ever visit Cheshire? no thanks.
"did you ever visit Cheshire? no thanks."
Ahh yes, Hamden, one of the beacon skid-mark towns in CT. Hamden makes Waterbury feel safe.
"Sly like a fox" comes to mind whenever W/S comes before the P&Z. Watch out because they only care about themselves and not Cheshire. Why should we see them every year? If they have five years by State law so be it. Let's get on with other things. By the way they (W/S)don't even own the land so if the owners get a better offer they will take advantage of it I'm sure. Stay tuned.
The last time that WS came before the P&Z they were talking about apartments no condos. Wait and see what an apartment complex will look like in 10 years. Talk about property values! What an asset!
To answer the first poster,
"Generally speaking, when you attend a public meeting of a government body that is required to be open to the public by law, you are free to record that meeting through note-taking, sound and video recording devices, and photography, so long as the method of recording used is reasonable and not disruptive."
from http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/recording-public-meetings-and-court-hearings
Post a Comment