|
|
Post by Wethersfield.com on Sept 23, 2005 21:31:27 GMT -5
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
(3 year term) Charter Sec. 504 (9)
Theresa A. Forsthingy, V.Chr. R 18 Monticello Drive 7-1-2003 to 6-30-2006
John Hallisey R 23 Bond Street 7-1-2003 to 6-30-2006
Joseph L. Hammer, Chr. D 65 Broad Street 7-1-2004 to 6-30-2007
Thomas A. Harley D 289 Cedar Street 7-1-2005 to 6-30-2008
Robert P. Jurasin D 265 Hang Dog Lane 7-1-2004 to 6-30-2007
Philip Knecht, Clerk D 100 Executive Square 7-1-2004 to 6-30-2007
Dorcas McHugh D 508 Highland Street 7-1-2005 to 6-30-2008
Frederick E. Petrelli, Jr. D 790 Wells Road 7-1-2005 to 6-30-2008
Margaret M. Wagner R 203 Clearfield Road 2-22-2005 to 6-30-2006
Alternates: (3 year term) (3) Sec. 10-27
Daniel A. Camilliere D 148 Ox Yoke Drive 7-1-2005 to 6-30-2008
David Edwards III R 200 Windmill Hill 11-17-2003 to 6-30-2006
Peter Leombruni D 200 Broad Street 7-1-2004 to 6-30-2007
|
|
|
|
Post by BuckWheat on Sept 25, 2005 9:08:18 GMT -5
I think the P&Z made the right choice for the new "senior housing" in the Old Reservoir area.
They are right on looking out for the future by expanding our grand list.
|
|
|
|
Post by SyZyGy on Sept 25, 2005 10:21:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by morganika on Sept 25, 2005 11:27:09 GMT -5
First off, where is the Old Reservoir area, just curious? And also, in the Town Managers report she mentioned a house for sale and the taxes were listed too low. Does anyone know if this was the house on River Road, because I saw that and felt furious about the taxes and wondered if mine had been calculated incorrectly.  That's all for now. |
|
|
|
Post by Dr.Ken Sokolowski on Sept 25, 2005 18:36:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by oldetowne on Sept 26, 2005 6:26:46 GMT -5
Adding more residential property is the worst way to try to "increase the grand list". Even if this is adult housing which theoretically doesn't burden the school system, they are residents who will demand services and their roads and property will require maintenance. The only person who gains from this is the developer. I would argue that it would be more cost effective in the long run for the town to buy the property and keep it as open space than to approve any kind of residential development there.
This doesn't even take into account such things as devaluing neighboring properties, traffic congestion at the intersection of Old Reservoir and Two Rod, potential impacts on the wetlands and the storage capacity of that land, kicking off the likely development of the entire Wilkus parcel, etc.
|
|
MikeC
Silver Member
I know what I know
Posts: 52
|
Post by MikeC on Sept 29, 2005 20:36:03 GMT -5
The TP&Z should be ashamed of their selves for making this type of decision. I was fortunate enough to be part of over 200 people to show up during the open discussion on this and 99.9% of the people were against this. Since this board doesn’t represent the interest of the current homeowners we should do a few things; replace this board with competent people or have another town referendum on this project.
Why would you put cluster housing disguised as over 55 living in the most prominent area of Wethersfield? You have $600K - $800K houses the street before this and now the Town is going to allow a 1400 square foot house in the middle of this. What is this board thinking?
What happens if this developer pulls out and the next guy builds high-rise apartment building, which could be done since the zoning has changed?
What about the people who live next to this, what will now happen to their property values. They surely won’t be going up.
I think the TP&Z were more concerned about the developers profits than the over the 250 houses this will effect on both end of Old Reservoir and the Back Lane area. I guess they wanted to send a message to the higher income people that they are the bosses and don’t tell us what to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldetowne on Sept 30, 2005 6:02:24 GMT -5
You and your 200 neighbors should go to the next Council meeting on Monday night. The Council can't reverse the decision, but they appointed the members of P&Z and should know how you feel. Besides, having a pack of people show up at Council meetings is the only way to get anything accomplished some times.
|
|
|
|
Post by SyZyGy on Sept 30, 2005 6:56:35 GMT -5
MikeC, you wrote: and OldeTowne, your wrote: You are both right. But, I would suggest (humbly of course) that just showing up at Town Council and talking to the Russ-ian Wall is not enough.
You and your 200 plus very, very unhappy neighbors should organize and vote for a REGIME CHANGE, even if it means voting for the not-currently-dominant party on the Town Council. I know, some of you might have second thoughts about doing that, but just how much is your neighborhood worth.
Just remember the Sassano Affair: rank and file Dem's were sufficiently "put off" by the arrogance of the whole thing that they let the Rep's have a go at it.
If you and you neighbors could extract "campaign promises" (we all know how the pols like to taut that they are supposedly keeping those promises) from those other-party candidates, you might have a good chance of helping to keep neighborhoods like yours safer in the future.
In the mean time, get a lawyer or two and take the Town for Court ASAP. |
|
|
|
Post by Wethersfield.com on Oct 3, 2005 20:18:23 GMT -5
I must admit that I’m thoroughly disgusted of the formal outcome of the TP+Z on their very shallow thought process in a decision that will effect so many. With so many local residents coming in to voice there no approval of this project and it basically fell upon deaf ears. The committee seemed to be more concerned about the grand list, the landowner and the developer’s profits rather than focusing on the concerns of the neighborhood and how it will affect them, including me.
The public should be made aware that the audience wasn’t against development, it just wanted the committee to enforce the double AA zoning so the existing neighborhoods would be enhanced by the continuation of AA zoning. What this boiled down to is that the developer can now put in 39 cluster houses vs. the AA zoning of 23 homes that would match the over all continuity of the area.
I agree with one of the posters that members of this committee must be more scrutinized before being selected an appointed to these key committees.
Bill Randazzo
|
|
RGarrey
Gold Member
WCTV "Wethersfield Live" Channel 14
Posts: 84
|
Post by RGarrey on Oct 3, 2005 21:48:38 GMT -5
Bill, I couldn't agree with you more. This decision is not only a poor decision just for this one development but it opens the door for other cluster type developments on the remaining farmland in the area. I also understand that this decision was made without seeing a formal plan from the developer. If this is true then it is even more unbelievable that this decision was made. How can you make a drastic change like that without knowing what the plan is.
Also oldetowne you are right on the money. Residential housing units are not the way to grow the grandlist and by increasing the number of units allowed from 1.8 per acre to 6 this is worse for the grandlist. I know that the developer claims it will be an over 55 development but again there is no plan and I would have to believe that if the units don't sell or circumstances change then he will change the restrictions to allow families.
I don't know what happened to the P&Z on this decision, but in the past I always felt they were thinking of what's best for the neighborhoods and town from a quality of life standpoint, not how their decision would affect the grandlist.
I don't know the make up of this board as far as experience and qualifications but I agree Bill that these appointments are too important to be political. Also the Council should be setting goals and creating plans of development so that all boards and commisions are working toward the same end.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldetowne on Oct 4, 2005 6:11:09 GMT -5
Bill and Rick - I agree with you both and thanks for posting. This is yet another example, in a long line of examples, of town government being out of touch and not being accountable to the residents for its decisions.
The Council majority will talk you to death about their commitment to open space. There's a substantial chunk of change in the account (you would be surprised how much - I was) and the only acquisition they have proposed is for 30K behind some houses near Wintergreen Woods (and P&Z said it was a waste of money). I couldn't find that lot if you let me use BOTH police dogs. Meanwhile, developers like this one are drooling over the few remaining parcels of farmland in town.
The other equally large issue is that we are once again ignoring any sort of rational planning for the development of land in town. Then again, following the plan hasn't been an obsession with town government lately either. Whatever shiny object is dangled in front of them - be it lights and turf or a dog park - becomes the cause of the day to the exclusion of other things that have been deteriorating for decades.
|
|
|
|
Post by SyZyGy on Oct 4, 2005 10:23:20 GMT -5
Yes Sirreeh, Folks,
Just remember it's the current Democrat-controlled Town Council which is responsible for creating the current Planning and Zoning Commission (AKA, TPZ or PZC) that has given you folks in the Southwest quadrant of Town the recent, ill-considered zone change.
The local election is November 8, 2005 - VOTE!
|
|
|
|
Post by cruzrt on Oct 4, 2005 19:02:31 GMT -5
Can anything be done by citizens now to force P&Z to revisit their Back Lane approval of the Over-55 project? I thought I heard someone say at last night's Town Council meeting that we could try to get a petition accepted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wethersfield.com on Oct 4, 2005 19:09:14 GMT -5
"members of this committee must be more scrutinized before being selected an appointed to these key committees" Bill Randazzo I would like to make a correction in my last statement; after reviewing many of the qualifications of the TP&Z members I now believe this group was scrutinized reasonably well by any and all involved. Don’t get me wrong; I still believe they didn’t do due-diligence to the neighbors during this process. I’m still not sure if this committee heard the strong arguments against this project because they never elaborated on any of them when they made the approval. Bill R |
|
That's all for now.
