The Cheshire Town Post

~ by Craig Houghton - January 18, 2008 ~

01-22-08 EDIT: Please read this post here. The “leaked” findings are not an indication of premature approval. They are part of normal procedure!

at the close of my conversation with Martin (see the comments for this post), I wrote the following

“…While I am definitely opposed to the mall, I am no fan of misinformation.

My conclusion, specifically regarding the significance of this document, was entirely off-target. I will retract the original post and write a new one explaining the “leaked” document. In the absence of real information, I stumbled around in the dark and rushed towards the only visible light.”

I had written that we, “are at least owed an explanation.” Martin provided that. Many thanks.

CSH

-=-

It is the opinion of the Commission that this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

This doesn’t look like good news for fans of process. In fact, it’s downright humiliating for anyone that has endured hours of meetings listening to a W/S sales pitch while waiting to contribute, only to find that the audience dwindled to a stalwart few and the press all went home. Considering what Cindy posted yesterday over at the Underground Town Hall, I am surprised the PZC even bothered. It looks like the process has been nothing more than pageantry. Cindy posted in two parts: here is part one and part two.

from the Underground Town Hall

This is going to be a long post, so I am going to break it up into two separate posts. Frankly, after what I found in my mailbox this afternoon, I wonder why they even had this meeting and will have another “meeting” Jan 22, with the final decision to be made on the 28th of January.

I’ve heard some rumors, but I really have no idea how or why this was leaked. Considering that new information is still coming in, it’s just horrifying to see this draft written up in such detail and finality.

It was a “DRAFT: FINDINGS -W/S Development Zone Map Change.

This is the wording on the DRAFT.

“According to State law, the PZC is acting in a legislative capacity when dealing with a proposed zone map change. As such, it is only required to apply its informed judgement to the questions of whether the proposed change is in the best interest of the Town as a whole, and consistent with the Plan of Development & Conservation. In this case, however, additional findings are required.

Section 45B.6 of the Cheshire Zoning Regulations states that the Commission may approve a zone change to an Interchange Special Development District and the Interchange Special Development Project only if, in the opinion of the Commission, the applicant has met al of the standards set forth in this section of the regulations, and if the Commission finds that the zone map change and project ae in the best interests of the town. The discretion to make these findings belongs solely to the Commission as this section states that the Commission must make these findings only in its own judgement.

In addition, Section 22a of the Connecticut General Statutes requires the Commission to consider the entire record with regard to the application’s potential environmental impact.

The twenty areas in which findings are required were the subject of extensive oral and written testimony. The Commission held nearly 20 hours of hearings and reviewed over 1000 pages of written submissions. The opinions of the applicant, the intervenor and the public were considered, and particularly those of the professional staff. To ensure that the Commission had the best and most complete information, the Town engaged an outside, disinterested professional consultant, whose input has been invaluable.

Each of the twenty standards is listed below. In each case, there were positive and negative features of the proposal, which the Commission has weighed carefully. In some cases, the Commission feels that changes in the proposed regulations are necessary to meet the standard. These will be discussed in the decision which follows these findings.

a) The special regulations, as proposed, as well as the proposed development are consistent with the intent of these Interchange Special Development District regulations, the Cheshire Plan of Conservation and Development, and the laws and standards for zone changes and amendments in the State of Connecticut.

The proposed regulations offer a number of amendments over existing regulations and cover a variety of topics. In considering such a wide-ranging revision of the existing rules, attention ut be paid to the specific details. The Commission has reviewed these and has made the changes described in the decision below. With these changes, it is the opionion of theCommision that the application meets the requirements of this standard.

b) The proposed project is designed with recognition of a site’s context and character.

A site’s content and character are defined by natural and manmade characteristics within and around its perimeter. The context for this property is established in part by the I-691 interchange and associated highway frontage, its proximity to existing industrial areas and to the commerical areas along Route 322, by its nearly 1400 feet of frontage on Route 10, and by Dickerman Road that runs along the westerly boundary. Furthermore, the remains of the Farmington Canal as evidenced by the Great Fill also contribute to the site’s context and character.

The context also includes the Ten Mile River corridor with existing floodway and floodplan and regulated wetland areas, and its proximity to the recently developed residential area just north of this property. Any development of this property must be done with consideration of these unique characteristics. Finally, the site will serve as the Norther gateway to the Town.

The Commission walked the site and observed these features first hand. They saw the damage done to the river banks by uncontrolled use of off-road vehicles, and the collapsed culvert at the Great Fill. The proposed development will not only resotre and preserve the Ten Mile River and its banks and the Great Fill, but will make them the centerpiece of the development.

It is the opinion of the Commission that, with some changes in the specific regulations, particulary with regard to landscaping, this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

c) That the natural features of the land have been considered as design determinants.

As noted above, the site has many distinctive natural and historical features. In particular, much testimony dealt with the need to preserve and protect the Ten Mle River and its environs. The site design on the proposed plan includes corridor widths ranging from 1oo feet in the central area to in excess of 1,000 feet from Dickerman Road perimeter. It is the commission’s opinion that the design of this proposal represents an earnest effort to protect the Ten Mile River corridor.

Development on the remaining portions of the site is being done to minimize fill and excessive grading. In addition, there is no development propoed on the small portion other site that lies within the aquifer protection area in the southeasterly corner.

The Commission notes that the application was unanimoulsy approved by the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commissions. It is the opinion of the Commission that, with some changes to the proposed regulations, this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

d) That important historic and archaeological characteristics have been respected and considered as design determinants.

The historic Farminton Canal and aqueduct lies within the central area of this site. The aqueduct was constructed in the early 19th century to establish an elevation for the canal to cross the Ten Mile River. This aqueduct and great fill area were severely disturbed by flodding in the spring of 2007.

This application proposes reconstruction of the aqueduct using modern standards along with the preservation of the original stone arches. There is also a visitor area and heritage monument proposed in teh central portion of the site that will review the history of the Farmington Canal and the importance of this property in that context.

The applicants are proposing a wood trestle bridge for motor vehicles and pediestrians to cross the river. The wood trestles have been chosen to aument the historic setting on the portion of the site.

It is the opinion of the Commission that this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

e) Community facilities, utilities and/or services as presently existing or to be provided by teh applicant, will not be overburdened due to the increase in population or activity caused by the new development.

The applicant for this project will construct public water and sewer as required by the Cheshire Zoning Regulations. The Water Pollution control authority (WPCA) granted the request for the feasibility at their meeting of December 19, 2007. A copy of those minutes of those proceedings is attached. In this acton, the WPCA states that the sanitary sewarage system is generally capable of construction and is capable of being connected to the Town of Cheshire public sanitary sewer system. The WPCA will have final approval of final design of the system, discussion of which is contained in the munutes from the December meeting. assuming this final approval, the utilities required will not overburden the available services. Public safety issues are discussed below.

f) There will not be any significant public safety or fire protection problems and that emergency access is adequately provided.

The Cheshire Police and Fire departments have issued comments to the applicant and Commission during the public hearing phase of this proposal. Both departments requested an emergency access drive from Route 10 that is being provided by the applicant who also offered to dedicate some square footage and parking within the facilaity for public safety personnel to use as needed. They also inted to provide private, on-site security the level of which they have offered to discuss with the Cheshire Police Department.

The Police Department anticipates the need for an additional patrol car for the North End to meet the needs of this project and other developments in the area. The cost for this additional service will be offset by the addtional tax revenues from the development.

EDITORS NOTE: I AM SKIPPING TO THE END. MORE OF THIS “DRAFT” IN THE NEXT POST.

r) There is a reasonable assurance that the developer has the financial and organizational capability to complete the project as submitted.

The applicant has provided the necessary documentation to support this standard. The Commission can find no evidence to cast doubt that this developer is capable of completing this project.

It is the opinion of the commission that this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

f) The overall project is in the best interest of the Town.

Based upon the discussion above, as well as upon the positive fiscal impact of the development, the Commission concludes that the overall project is, in fact, in the best interest of the town.

After due consideration of the entire record, the Commision finds that the applicant’s proposed Zone Map Change, Interchange Special Development District Project Plan, and Aquifer Protection Application are not reasonably likely to have the effect of unreasonably polluting, imparing or destroying the public trust in the air, water or other natural resources of the state. Furthermore, it is the opinion of the Cheshire Planning and zoning Commission that this application meets all of the standards laid out in Section 45.B6 of the Zoning Regulations, and that it may, therefore, be approved by the Commission.

from part two

g) Any internal circulation system encourages pedestrian use and provides linkage throughout a development to the maximum extent possible.

The proposed development plan shows a walkway system beginning at two locations on Dickerman Road proceeding through the open, common areas within the proposed residential portion of the site and also along the buffer area adjacent to the Ten Mile River. The walkways cross the rier at two locations: one across restored Great Fill and culvert leading through the area of the heritage monument into the restaurant court portion of the site. This area also contains some outdoor eating areas and terraced overlooks of the river. Pedestrians also have the option of crossing the river on the proposed timber bridge that is proposed with a dedicated walkway. The primary retail portion of the site has clearly defined walkways that are shown with distinctive crossing across the interior roadways.

The Commission believes that the provision of public acces along and to the Ten Mile River corridor is an important design feature well attended to within this proposal. It is also our opinion that the location of the walkways will maximize pedestrian safety.

h) Separation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic is maintained to the greatest extent possible.

As noted above, pedesetrian and vehicular traffic is well-separated in the proposed development. The proposed trestle bridge has pedestrian traffic isolated by a divider from the vehicular traffic.

It is the opinion of the Commission that this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

i) Adequate on-site parking for the proposed development is provided, consistent with items f) through h), above.

The Commission is concerned that the proposed standard (1.5 spaces per unit) for the residential area is inadequate. EDITORS NOTE: WHAT ABOUT THE RETAIL PART? IS THAT WHY A PARKING GARAGE WAS DISCUSSED. WESTFARMS MALL, MERDEN SQUARE AND TRUMBULL MALL HAD TO BUILD PARKING GARAGES AND THEY ARE USUALLY FILLED.

The regulations will be modified to change this to 2 spaces per unit. (See below.) The appliant has provided reasonable demonstrations, via aerial photography at peak periods, that the proposed retail parking will be adequate even in the holiday season. Theatre parking is to be in an underground garage, reducing the impermeable surface required.

EDITORS NOTE: PARKING FOR THE THEATER IN AN UNDERGROUND GARAGE? WHEN WAS THIS DISCUSSED AND WHEN DID THE PUBLIC HAVE A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON IT?

It is the opinion of the Commission that this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

j) Storm water run-off will be controled wherever retention or detention is possible and that all proper and necessary easements will have been obtained by the applicant.

The stormwater management system was designed with extensive infiltration and pretreatment. There are no direct discharges into the Ten Mile River. The IWWC has noted that the applicant has stated that the proposed stormwater management designs will have the least impact on the wetlands and watercourses on or off the site compared to alternative storm water management designs presented during the public hearings. The applicant reports that no easements are needed from any entity for the installation of the stormwater management system.

The site plan does create a spillway over a portion of the Great Fill for flood control purposes. Though historically significant, the Great Fill became a dam for floodwaters upon its construction in 1820. The proposed spillway will provide a by-pass for 100 year and greater storm events, reducing the upstream of the Great Fill.

It is the opinion of the Commission that this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

k) The design and construction of buildings, other structures and facilities by virtue of their location, orientation, texture, materials, landscaping, general bulk and height and other features would be consistent with the Town and would show design merit.

This center is proposed in an area whose landscape is dominated by an Interstate Highway with an interchange, an area within the community that is best suited for projects of scale. The retail portion of this project is broken up into plaza blocs that are separated by pedestrian walkways. Based on the typical renderings provided by the applicant, the Commission feels this will be aesthetic and not overpowering development.

The largest commercial building currently proposed is the theatre, which has 75,000 sq ft. of space. The anchor store at the other end is currently shown as -50,000 sw. ft, or smaller than the existing Super Stop & Shop in town. This is consistent with the general limitations on commercial buildings.

It is the opinion of the Commission that this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

l) The perimeter edge of the proposed development relates to existing development with respect to scale and setback.

As noted above, the organization of buildings upon this property avoids unfoavorable scale at the perimeter edge of this property. Changes in the landscaping requirements (below) will improve the appearance of the perimeter. A reasonable setback has been provided between this project and the residential development on the northern edge of the property and that a more substantial landscaping buffer has been provided along this edge.

EDITORS NOTE: JUST LIKE THE LANDSCAPING BUFFER ON ST. JOSEPH STREET!!

It is the opinion of the Commission that, with changes to the proposed regulations, this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

m) Landscaping, lighting, graphics, street furniture have beenn coordinated to create a pleasing public environment.

All of the above are shown in the Conceptual Architectural and Signage information supplied by the applicant. The Commission believes that the presentation of these in the report is generally favorable and establishes a good point of beginning for refinement during the site plan phase.

It is the opinion of the Commission that, with changes to the proposed regulations, this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

n) The open space system including pedestrian walks is usable, beneficial and can logically be expected to connect to existing and/or future walks on abutting properties.

Access and use of the open space areas has been provided on the proposed plan including a pedestrian nature walk within the river corridor and a public gathering lawn overlooking the river on the residential side of the property.

The plan includes an organized open space area around the restaurant court in the central portion of the site. This open space has public access from all sides and will create beneficial activity in tis center portion of the site.

All of these elements combined with the pedestrian walkways will firmly establish the importance of pedestrian activity within this project.

The proposed plans also indicate a future connection the the Farmington Canal Heritage Trail and it is assumed that the applicant will make a sincere effort to accomplish this linkage.

It is the opinion of the Commission that this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

o) Open space set aside or established pursuant to the proposed application site plan shall be made available for public use. The open space land shall be held in ownership by the applicant landwoner and shall be subject to an agreement with the Town to be filed on the Land Records at the time of approval regarding the applicant landowner’s responsibility for maintenance of said open space.

This site contains large ares of property that will remain undeveloped within the Ten ile river corridor. As noted earlier, this open space will be available for public use with the creation of the pedestrian nature walk.

The specific legal documentation regarding continued ownership, stewardship, and public use must be submitted during the site plan phase of approvals. It is anticipated that the public will also have access to and use of the public gathering area and overlook field on the residential side of the property. All of these concerns should be addressed in the legal documents. This requirement is being added to the revised regulations (below).

It is the opinion of the Commission that, with changes to the proposed regulations, this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

p) Recreational or park-like areas related to residential units shall be shown.

The residential portion of this site contains common areas between neighborhood blocks with a pedestrian walkway, access to the nature walk, active recreation with tennis courts, an overlook field and a public gathering lawn on this side of the Ten Mile River.

It is the opinion of the Commission that this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

q) Any residential units proposed will be beneficial to the Town of Cheshire, satisfy a demonstrated need within the local housing market, and be integrated with and demonstrably enhance the overall development. The total floor area devoted to residential uses shall be less than 40% of the floor area of buildings devoted to other uses.

The burden of demonstrating need was upon the applicants and they have provided their opinion with statistical support in the “Market Study, Residential Component, The Shoppes of Cheshire” submitted with the application. The 40% floor area requirement is a hard and fast rule and there has not been any attempt to exceed this requirement. The residential layout and building types may evolve somewhat based upon market conditions,but must always be less than 40% of the non-residential total and never exceed two bedrooms per unit.

The plan to provide condominium townhouses addresses a type of residential property that is not in Cheshire. It should be appealing to both young professionals working in Hartford, Waterbury, Meriden or New Haven, as well as “empty-nesters.”

It is the opinion of the Commission that this proposal meets the requirements of this standard.

This is so damned frustrating. There are a lot of people in this small town. Unfortunately, a handful of folks have taken it upon themselves to decide what’s best for the rest of us. If you’re not on Cheshire’s side, get the hell out of office.

Thanks for the show. You really had us going…

-=-

Take action. Write a letter to the editor. We are at least owed an explanation (or an investigation).

news@cheshireherald.com
letters@courant.com
letters@nhregister.com
opinion@rep-am.com
letters@record-journal.com