EAST LYME/WATERFORD
PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES
Thursday, FEBRUARY 23rd, 2006
Present: East Lyme Members: Mark Powers, Chairman,
Edward Morris, Paul Whitehouse
Waterford Members: Peter Storms, Vice-Chairman
Fred Grimsey Jr., Peter Scillieri,
Also Present: Attorney Edward B. O’Connell, East Lyme Town Counsel
Meg Parulis, East Lyme Planning Director
Tom Wagner, Waterford Planning & Zoning Director
Niantic River Gateway Commission Public Hearing for the purpose of considering the following: Submission by the East Lyme Zoning Commission following approval on December 1, 2005 of a Change of Zone from RU-120 Rural District to an Affordable Housing District for a portion of properties located at Calkins Road and Boston Post Road in the Town of East Lyme (Assessor’s Map 31, Lot 4 and Map 32, Lot 1). A portion of the lands affected by the Zone Change lie within the Conservation Zone as more particularly described in Section 25-109d of the CT General Statutes.
Chairman Powers called the Niantic River Gateway Commission Public Hearing to order at 7:07 PM. He noted that all members of the Commission were present and read into the record the Notice of Public Hearing noting that it had appeared in the New London Day on February 12, 2006 and February 20, 2006. He then called upon Attorney O’Connell to go over the proper procedures for those present and for the record.
Attorney O'Connell said that the territorial jurisdiction of the Niantic River Gateway Commission (NRGC) is called a conservation zone in the Statutes. The area in question here is a triangular area that the East Lyme Zoning Commission changed the zone on and a portion of it lies within the NRG conservation zone. The local Zoning Commission has standards and the task of the NRGC is to consider this East Lyme Zoning Commission zone change in relation to and if it is consistent with the NRG standards. Along with this process, there are two basic grounds for disqualification – one is if a member, through their other interests has a conflict of interest. This is determined by asking if others would see their decision as being influenced or tainted by their membership in these other affiliations. The other is if there is a personal or financial conflict of interest. Under this falls the concept of if there is an appearance of impropriety. Each member would want to consider if he or she should be disqualified or if they would be perceived as having a conflict when looked at under these grounds.
Mr. Grimsey said that he would like to state that he is the President of Save the River, Save the Hills and that he feels that he should make a statement. He said that he has no financial interest in the outcome of this hearing or the land there. Regarding a conflict of interest he said that he feels that his participation here was set up way before his interest in the land there and that he feels that he can separate the two and be fair and impartial in his decision.
Mr. Powers asked if anyone else on the Commission had anything to say. Hearing from no one, he called upon Ms. Parulis.
Ms. Parulis said that she was the Director of Planning in East Lyme and that she had a List of Exhibits that she wished to read into the record. (Complete list attached at end of Minutes). She then read into the record her own letter dated 2/23/06 and entered as Exhibit I (Attached at end of Minutes) the 11 NRG Standards followed by her own commentary on consistency of the Affordable Housing District (AHD) regulations with the established standards. She then said that she would turn this over so that they could hear from Tom Wagner from Waterford.
Mr. Wagner said that he has submitted his letter dated 2/23/06 regarding the NRG Standards and his opinion of the consistency of the zone change with those standards. This was entered into the record as Exhibit J. (Attached at end of minutes) He said that he was involved with the inception of this Commission and their standards. He noted that there is nothing here that is environmentally sensitive and that they have a copy of his letter in the record and he would not read it to them but would answer any questions that they might have. He also noted that where he had cited building heights that if they were in conflict with those cited by Ms. Parulis that they should follow the heights that she cited.
Mr. Powers said that they would now hear comments from the public regarding the consistency of this zone change with the NGR standards. He noted that they would listen to the public and then schedule another meeting to make a decision. He said that they could approve, reject or take no action. He asked that when speaking that they stick as closely as possible to the topic.
Mr. Grimsey asked the Planners about the AHD regulations and if, when they were referring to them, were they referring to those of the State?
Ms. Parulis said that it is the AHD standards as they exist within the East Lyme Zoning regulations that relate to this hearing and decision.
Mr. Powers called for comments from the public.
Carl Stamm, 5 Saunders Dr., Niantic said that he would read from his previous testimony regarding this area. He passed out copies to the Commission members and for the record. This was entered as Exhibit K. (Attached at end of Minutes) He noted the description of the land and the effect of the run-off from areas that would be paved were the property in question to be developed. He noted that while his comments are for the whole 37 acres that the seven (7) acres that are in question here are contained within those 37 acres.
Karin Kari, 6 Boston Post Road, East Lyme said that she went through the NRG Standards also and that she would not repeat what has already been said here. What she found in these standards is that they do not discourage constructive development. However, it seems to her that this does not mean that super high and dense development should be built here and rather that it is probably the perfect case of where this type of dense development should not be.
Bob Gadbois, 358 Boston Post Road, East Lyme said that this piece of property is a treasure and once it is lost it is gone forever. He thinks that they should think very hard about this and deny the zone change.
Marvin Schutt, 29 Edgewood Road North, East Lyme asked that they go as far as they can go to preserve as much as possible in the Hills.
Mr. Powers asked if anyone else wished to speak or if there were other questions.
Mr. Storms asked if they have a topography map of the area.
Ms. Parulis said that she did not except for a small version that would somewhat show them the zone change area.
Mr. Storms asked if there was something that she could have for them for the next meeting to show where the actual area is.
Ms. Parulis said that they couldn’t go by what the applicant used at the public hearing. They have to decide based upon the Gateway standards.
Mr. Storms said that he still would like a topography map of the Gateway area, as he was concerned about the ridgeline topography and the potential for run-off to the Gateway zone.
Mr. Wagner commented that one gentleman has spoken regarding this already and that he would not like to bring a map into the next meeting that is not here now as that would lead to other issues.
Mr. Storms said that he would like to know the topography of the ridgeline.
Mr. Stamm said that he could explain the types of vegetation found up there as he has been there many times. He presented a map and pointed out the ridgeline area on it and said that it is bare ledge or huckleberry with some mountain laurel. Most of the chestnut oak timber trees are found in the slope to Latimers Brook.
Mr. Powers asked Attorney O’Connell if they needed to have the map entered into the record in order to continue.
Attorney O’Connell said that they did as they are looking to establish a record.
Mr. Stamm said that the map exists in the application file of the developer.
Mr. Powers asked that this be identified and entered into the record as Exhibit L.
Mr. Stamm pointed out the topography lines on the map and where the 200’ mark is located. He noted the streams and wetland areas.
Mr. Scillieri asked if it could be said that most of the area is scrub and bare ledge and that it supports vegetation of a couple of feet in height with some larger trees.
Mr. Stamm said that there are scattered trees of the chestnut oak variety.
Mr. Powers thanked Mr. Stamm and asked Attorney O’Connell for his guidance on closing this public hearing or continuing it.
Attorney O’Connell said that if they feel that they have enough information regarding these seven (7) acres that they can close the hearing and they would have 65 days to make their decision. They could not accept any other information in the meantime.
Mr. Grimsey said that he did not see the developer present and wondered if they should leave the hearing open so that the developer could comment.
Attorney O’Connell said that it is the East Lyme Zoning Commission that submitted this to them and not the developer.
Mr. Storms asked if they could set another date for the public hearing, leaving it open and after that go into the decision process.
Attorney O’Connell said that they could however it would be up to them to decide if this would be the wise thing to do.
Mr. Grimsey said that he understands that the developer is not happy with this decision and that he also has another application for this area.
Ms. Parulis said that is not their purview here and not a part of this.
Mr. Scillieri asked Mr. Wagner if the AHD due to the nature of density would not be desirable in this area.
Mr. Wagner said that it is within their purview to look at their standards and to decide the indirect impacts because you don’t know the direct impacts as that is not under your purview here. Everything that went into the zone change decision is that of Zoning and the NRG Commission purview is if this is appropriate and still consistent to their standards.
Mr. Morris said that the AHD is a political term and with what the cost would be in going into that land up there – to use the term affordable is ridiculous.
Mr. Powers said that may or may not be the case however their purpose here is to look at the Zoning decision and the zone change sent to them per statute for consistency to the NRG standards and that is their only job here.
Mr. Storms asked Ms. Parulis if Zoning considered the Gateway when they made this decision to change the zone.
Ms. Parulis said that she did not know and that she would not worry about it as it is not under their purview here.
Attorney O’Connell said that Zoning is well aware of this review, as they are the party that sent it to them for review.
Mr. Powers said that he felt that they had enough information and that he could not see a reason to hold this hearing open. He asked for comments on this.
Mr. Wagner said that he had nothing to add and that he had received no calls from the public asking that they be allowed to speak at a later time. He said that he sees no necessity to continuing this hearing.
Mr. Scillieri said that he saw no reason to leave the hearing open.
**MOTION (1)
Mr. Scillieri moved that this Public Hearing of the Niantic River Gateway Commission be closed.
Mr. Morris seconded the motion.
Vote: 6 – 0 – 0. Motion passed.
Mr. Powers said that they would have to decide on a meeting date to make their decision.
Ms. Parulis said that she would work to set a date up for them to meet.
Mr. Powers closed this Public Hearing at 8:25 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Karen Zmitruk,
Recording Secretary, Pro-Tem, East Lyme
*A Complete Minutes package has been filed with the Town Clerks in East Lyme and Waterford
Niantic River Gateway Commission
Public Hearing 2/23/06
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A – Copy of the Legal Ad that ran in the New London Day on 2/12/06 & 2/20/06
Exhibit B - The Notice of Public Hearing that was posted in Waterford and East Lyme on 2/13/06
Exhibit C – Memo dated 2/26/06 to Mark Nickerson, Chairman of the Zoning Commission notifying him that the Niantic River Gateway Commission would be holding this Public Hearing regarding the referral from Zoning
Exhibit D – Initial Referral Letter dated 12/20/05 from the Zoning Commission to the Niantic River Gateway Commission noting the Zone Change Approval granted at the meeting of the Zoning Commission on 12/1/05
Exhibit E – Map of the change in zone from RU-120 to AHD within the conservation zone
Exhibit F – Copy of the legal notice of the zone change decision by the Zoning Commission that ran in the New London Day on 12/14/05
Exhibit G – Copy of the Niantic River Gateway Commission standards adopted/dated 3/1/02
Exhibit H– Copy of the AHD Regulations in effect at the time of the zone change
Exhibit I – Letter dated 2/23/06 to Mark Powers, Chairman Niantic River Gateway Commission from Meg Parulis, EL Director of Planning, regarding the impact of the zone change on the Niantic River Gateway Conservation Zone and outlining the Gateway standards in conjunction with this change
Exhibit J – Memo dated 2/23/06 to the Niantic River Gateway Commission from Thomas Wagner, Waterford Planning Director outlining the Gateway standards and offering his opinion on the consistency of the zone change in conjunction with the NRG standards
Exhibit K – Letter from Carl Stamm dated 8/15/05 & 2/19/06 outlining his comments with respect to the subject zone change property in question
Exhibit L – Sewer Service Boundary Comparison Map, East Lyme, CT dated 8/31/05