SHARE - Dorset Crossing update !!! - 2008/06/13 06:47This post deals with the pending application to build Dorset Crossing, which would be located north of the Intl Skate Center. SHARE is opposed to the proposed zoning amendment based on its wording and negative possible impact upon the whole town. Here is the latest News Flash from SHARE:
--------------
IMPORTANT Zoning Commission Public Hearing on Dorset Crossing Zoning Text Amendment Monday, June 16th, 7:00 pm at Simsbury Public Library. We urge all residents to attend and speak out against a permanent and drastic zoning change that could destroy the integrity of the current Simsbury zoning regulations! If approved this zoning amendment will remove the protections our current use based zoning regulations provide to all of our homes and neighborhoods and open the entire town to undesirable and inappropriate development.
This is a long but very important email. Please read it through!
We wanted to alert you to a disturbing development which could, in a worst case scenario, have a dramatic impact on how Simsbury develops and could facilitate the reemergence of Big-Box development in Simsbury on the CL&P Southern Gateway site or in other areas of Simsbury. It could also, quite literally, destroy the concept of single use zones in Simsbury and allow for businesses to be built in any zone, including residential.
Here are the details.
On April 21st, the Keystone Companies LLC and Dorset Crossing LLP submitted a Zoning Text and Zoning Map Amendment for their property commonly referred to as the Northern Gateway site in the Simsbury Plan of Conservation & Development (POCD). We have attached a copy of this application for your reference. In this application the developers want to change the zone designations for portions of their property in order to build a mixed-use development. They also submitted text changes to be made to Simsbury's town-wide zoning regulations which would enable the development of Dorset Crossing as a mixed-use development however these changes to the Simsbury zoning regulations could then be applied anywhere in Simsbury.
It is essential for you to understand that if these zoning text changes are approved by the Zoning Commission, then they will apply to all properties with those zone designations. A further concern is that land owners of properties with other zone designations may apply for a change to this new zone. This is a similar situation to what Konover Development was attempting to do with the creation of a town-wide floating Planned Development District (PDD) zoning text amendment.
As with the Konover PDD, the Dorset Crossing proposed zoning text amendment, if approved would have permanent and critical, town wide ramifications to our current zoning regulations. These include:
· The amendment, if approved, will provide legislation for future applicants for new development or for re-development, to request a mix of uses in current single use zones. Essentially all zones can become mixed use throughout all of Simsbury.
· If the Zoning Commission approves this amendment as is, it will allow residential "R" in business "B" zones. Therefore, it would set a legal precedent for an applicant to apply for business "B" use in residential "R" zones (e.g. a convenience store in a neighborhood)!
· The applicant is requesting a fundamental change of our current use based zoning regulations (the concept in which all of Simsbury's zoning regulations are predicated on), by asking for the ability to mix uses in a single use zone which would destroy the integrity of use based zoning throughout Simsbury.
· Approval of this zoning text amendment would therefore remove the protection that our current separate use based zoning regulations provide us as homeowners and property owners throughout the Town of Simsbury
There are numerous flaws with the Dorset Crossing zoning text amendment. Recently SHARE sent the attached email to John Loomis the Chairman of the Simsbury Planning Commission outlining our concerns and urging the Planning Commission to send a negative referral to the Zoning Commission on this application. Below is a summary of some of the other concerns we have regarding the Dorset Crossing zoning text amendment:
· The application's omission of specificity in the percent of mixed-use and enforcement language for the ultimate construction of the proposed mixed-use components. As in the Konover PDD, without required percentages of mixes of use, a developer would be able to build either just retail or just residential.
· The application's large individual building square footage caps when total allowable square footage is calculated (the application allows for multiple buildings of 25,000 square foot per floor with up to 3 floors = 75,000 square foot buildings), and with no restrictions on how many of these buildings could be built on a single lot, could result in a development of excessive and inappropriate size, scale and density without regard to the surrounding areas
· The omission of language requiring bonding and phasing and completion for a complete build out, which would allow a developer to walk away from a project that was only partially built
· The omission of required net economic, net fiscal, environmental and traffic studies needed to determine the actual costs and benefits to the town of a proposed project
The above are just some of SHARE's main concerns with the Dorset Crossing zoning text amendment application. Frankly given these glaring issues, we thought it was obvious that the Planning Commission would provide a negative referral to the Zoning Commission. However, in the 2.5 years of SHARE's activities in Simsbury, we have learned that the Town of Simsbury often seems to strive to surprise its citizens - and this was no exception!
Please understand that the Planning Commission, by law, must evaluate all such applications to the town and provide the Zoning Commission with either a positive or negative referral. SHARE felt that it should be obvious to the Planning Commission that the application as written had numerous significant deficiencies and that the zoning language submitted by the application was clearly too vague and insufficient to serve the town's interests.
However, shockingly, by a vote of 4-2 the Planning Commission voted to provide a positive referral to the Zoning Commission for the Dorset Crossing application - a positive referral that is truly strange, inconceivable, inconsistent with their past thinking and actions, inherently flawed reasoning, and really, really bad precedent.
Voting in favor of the positive referral to the Zoning Commission were Chairman John Loomis, Gerry Post, Ferg Jansen, and Chip Houlihan. Voting against the positive referral were Sue Bednarczyk and Julie Myer.
So What's Next?
Your SHARE Steering Committee feels strongly that the job to create zoning regulations should be the job of the Town and its elected officials and not the job of some developer who wants to shoe-horn regulations into place that may help that developer but disadvantage the town and the homeowners. Keep in mind that once zoning regulations are altered for the convenience of one developer, they are permanently in place for everyone.
As an example of why this is potentially problematic, the 25,000 square foot times 3 floors cap in the application language would allow buildings of up to 75,000 square feet in particular business zones throughout Simsbury. That is a Big Box! That is bigger than the Super Stop and Shop in Simsbury Commons! And if the Zoning Commission allows this to be a part of the zoning regulations, then any business parcel anywhere in Simsbury could have any number of buildings up to 75,000 square feet in size. This is clearly a BIG ISSUE for Simsbury!
Next Monday June 16th at 7 PM at Simsbury Public Library the Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this application and possibly vote on it. It is important that SHARE members attend the meeting to express their opinions about it. We believe that special focus for comments should be on the zoning text amendment and the deficiencies we outlined in bullet form above.
Please be sure to either email Dunny Barney, Chairman of the Simsbury Zoning Commission (ABarney@simsbury-ct.gov) and CC Hiram Peck, Simsbury Town Planner (hpeck@simsbury-ct.gov) or attend the Zoning Commission meeting on June 16th. If you send an email, we suggest your email say something like:
We believe that the Dorset Crossing Zoning Text Amendment is overly vague and is not appropriate for adoption into Simsbury's zoning regulations. We think that the Town of Simsbury should write its own site specific mixed-use zoning regulations that allow for mixed-use zones in appropriate locations only and in a way which are legally responsible and not subject to litigation or controversy.
Please vote to deny the current Dorset Crossing Zoning Text Amendment application.
Thank you for your consideration of my views.
Sincerely,
Name
Address
------------------------------
Let the Town know what you think about these issues and why the Town shouldn't let developers write town-wide zoning regulations for their own purposes that can impact the entire Town of Simsbury. Please be sure your voice is heard!
Sincerely,
Your Devoted SHARE Steering Committee
Post edited by: Anthony Napolitano, at: 2008/06/13 06:49
Registered users are welcome to participate in discussions.
If you are already registered, please login first. Not registered? Signup for free!
DirtyJobsGuy
User Senior Board Member
Posts: 13
Re:SHARE - Dorset Crossing update !!! - 2008/06/13 07:52Simsbury screwed up with the Skating Center lured by the "big lights" and lost a good chunk of potential tax revenue in this area.
It is a good location for mixed residential/commerical as Simsbury is really a poor place for pure commercial property. A look at any truly rural town (not Faux rural like simsbury where we have to subsidize a tiny dairy farm) would show that a convenience store near residences is a good thing providing the services the old general store did and reducing travel.
Sometimes I think that Simsbury should be featured on the popular web site http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/ because it gets more and more pretentious every day.
Registered users are welcome to participate in discussions.
If you are already registered, please login first. Not registered? Signup for free!
uconniac
User Platinum Board Member
Posts: 764
Re:SHARE - Dorset Crossing update !!! - 2008/06/13 12:00DirtyJobsGuy wrote: Sometimes I think that Simsbury should be featured on the popular web site http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/ because it gets more and more pretentious every day.
Okay, now that made me laugh. Thanks DirtyJobsGuy.
Registered users are welcome to participate in discussions.
If you are already registered, please login first. Not registered? Signup for free!
SBspook
User Senior Board Member
Posts: 19
Re:SHARE - Dorset Crossing update !!! - 2008/06/18 09:38Yes - The skating rink is a huge money pit for the town (and Simsbury is not the only town in the US to have fallen for this scam).
While Dorset Crossing could potentially bring some life to that corner of Simsbury, the issue at hand is whether or not The Town of Simsbury is going to let developers write new zoning regulations.
I think it would be wise for the town to formulate it's own regulations from this proposed charette process, rather than allow self interested developers draft regulations specific to their own developments and motives. The language in Dorset's application is weak and would virtually eliminate all existing zoning regulations.
So while having a quick-e-mart close by would be convenient (with $4 / gal gas), should the town set a legal precedent that would allow someone to put a quick-e-mart, tattoo parlor, or Hooter's in the middle of a residential neighborhood?
By approving the current application, the Town is opening a pandora's box and it's a sure bet that the former developer of the proposed River Oaks (and the property owner) will resurrect their own application or sue the town.
It also appears that either the people behind Dorset, or someone in Town Hall, are playing the same games they have for the past few years. At Monday night's Zoning Commission meeting, there was some controversy over when an email was sent (and received) by the Dorset developer requesting that two members of the Zoning Commission recuse themselves from the vote due to their past "involvement" with SHARE? The email was allegedly sent last Thursday (6/12), but not received until Monday (6/16) at 4pm.
I think it's time Mary G. wake up and actually do something, instead of cashing her paycheck & waiting for something on the State level to open up for her. The town needs a professional manager, not a professional politico.
Registered users are welcome to participate in discussions.
If you are already registered, please login first. Not registered? Signup for free!
SBspook
User Senior Board Member
Posts: 19
Re:SHARE - Dorset Crossing update !!! - 2008/06/18 09:39Yes - The skating rink is a huge money pit for the town (and Simsbury is not the only town in the US to have fallen for this scam).
While Dorset Crossing could potentially bring some life to that corner of Simsbury, the issue at hand is whether or not The Town of Simsbury is going to let developers write new zoning regulations.
I think it would be wise for the town to formulate it's own regulations from this proposed charette process, rather than allow self interested developers draft regulations specific to their own developments and motives. The language in Dorset's application is weak and would virtually eliminate all existing zoning regulations.
So while having a quick-e-mart close by would be convenient (with $4 / gal gas), should the town set a legal precedent that would allow someone to put a quick-e-mart, tattoo parlor, or Hooter's in the middle of a residential neighborhood?
By approving the current application, the Town is opening a pandora's box and it's a sure bet that the former developer of the proposed River Oaks (and the property owner) will resurrect their own application or sue the town.
It also appears that either the people behind Dorset, or someone in Town Hall, are playing the same games they have for the past few years. At Monday night's Zoning Commission meeting, there was some controversy over when an email was sent (and received) by the Dorset developer requesting that two members of the Zoning Commission recuse themselves from the vote due to their past "involvement" with SHARE? The email was allegedly sent last Thursday (6/12), but not received until Monday (6/16) at 4pm.
I think it's time Mary G. wake up and actually do something, instead of cashing her paycheck & waiting for something on the State level to open up for her. The town needs a professional manager, not a professional politico.
Registered users are welcome to participate in discussions.
If you are already registered, please login first. Not registered? Signup for free!
uconniac
User Platinum Board Member
Posts: 764
Re:SHARE - Dorset Crossing update !!! - 2008/06/19 08:13I wouldn't mind seeing some development in the north end of town (omg, its actually in my own back yard) but there are more choices than tatto parlors and Hooters, not that I think either of them would be allowed or want to come here. Remember, businesses are in the business of making money and they are not going to want to open in Simsbury if the demographics don't meet their needs. As for a quiki-mart, we already have that; its called Sunrise Convenience store. It doesn't sell gas, but Tim's does. What this area needs is something that isn't repetitive unless its a restaurant or 2.
As for the powers that be? I've never been a MG fan but I can't say that her predecessors acted any differently. Politician's are in the business of making false promises that will get them elected and the trend only continues. Until citizens of Simsbury speak up, whether through phone calls, letters or other methods and MG feels the heat, she has no reason to change her ways.
Registered users are welcome to participate in discussions.
If you are already registered, please login first. Not registered? Signup for free!
Specter (1116)
