Latest Updates
(Updated Sept. 27,
2008)
State election update: read candidates’ replies to C.A.R.E.’s questionnaire
here. And be sure to vote
November 4!
See C.A.R.E.’s position on the Lowe’s
Excellent overview of how to plan
for preserving
See what
… and compare with a fully-built out Canton tomorrow
“Dependence on the
property tax to fund local public services, particularly K-12 public education,
forces local governments into a destructive competition for grand list growth
that has resulted in bad land use decisions and costly sprawl.” – From “
In this Update:
--
Lowe’s will NOT build in
--
Zoning Commission considering Konover’s latest application for Lawton Rd./Rt.
44 corner
--
Collinsville Farmer’s Market begins 3rd season June 15
--
Residents approve purchase of 140-acre Cannon property
--
Collinsville Pedestrian Safety Committee issues report
--
C.A.R.E. receives Public Service Award from American Institute of Architects
--
Zoning Commission adopts design review regulations
--
Zoning Commission rejects hilltop proposal
--
Wetlands Agency allows violating sewer, water-hookups to remain
--
C.A.R.E. receives Citizen Planner Award from CT Chapter of American Planning
Association
--
--
Ax factory still on market
--
“Shoppes” developer asks twice, gets approval, for third anchor
Lowe’s will
not build a home center in
C.A.R.E. made the inquiry after hearing reports from multiple
reliable sources that Lowe’s had decided not to build – on Rt. 44 behind Valley
Car Wash and Legemere Park – because of both the economic downturn and the
comparatively high cost of developing this steep site.
To create a sufficiently large, flat surface on this hilly site
to accommodate a 147,000 sq. ft. store and parking lot, Lowe’s would have had
to excavate 250,000 cubic yards of earth and build retaining walls as high as
54 feet.
C.A.RE. opposed the Lowe’s application primarily because the
site’s topography cannot accommodate this size development, and because of the
precedent that approval would establish of allowing topography to be drastically
altered in order to accommodate a particular development, rather than building
to suit the site as Canton Zoning Regulations require.
Additionally, C.A.R.E. warned the Zoning Commission of the
possibility that an approved store would not actually be built. Earlier this year, the
Wall Street Journal reported that Lowe’s will delay opening 20 approved stores,
and that the chain had already planned to open 33 fewer stores this year than
the prior year. Since last June, Home Depot has also delayed or cancelled
opening 65 stores, and Wal-Mart has done the same with 58. At the zoning
hearing, a Lowe’s representative assured commissioners that Lowe’s had
thoroughly evaluated this market and this site, and was 100 percent committed
to building at this site in
Developer and rug merchant Abe Kaoud, who owned an option to
buy this site and was working with Lowe’s to develop it, declined to comment to
C.A.R.E. on whether he retains the option.
The site is zoned for Restricted Light Industrial use, but
the Zoning Commission may allow retail uses in this zone by special exception.
C.A.R.E.’s presentation to
the Zoning Commission can be seen here.
Said C.A.R.E. President
“This application points
out that the Canton Golf Course was NOT the last available parcel in town with
the potential to be developed with big box retail. By leveling topography,
combining lots, and redeveloping existing buildings, there is the potential for
a tremendous amount of square footage to be built along 44.
“It is our choice and
challenge to develop in a way that will respect our landscape, promote our
economic health, and preserve our character and identity.”
C.A.R.E. has supported Konover’s
current proposal but lead the opposition in 2000-2001 against Konover’s request
to rezone 17 residential acres.
Background:
-- 2001: Zoning Commission denies Konover's request to
rezone more than nine acres of residential land to business, in order to create
a 17-acre commercial parcel for 140,000 sq. ft. of retail, including a Target
store.
-- 2002: Zoning Commission creates a new zone, the
Albany Turnpike Gateway District (ATGD), that binds a zone change to a specific
development plan.
-- 2003: Zoning Commission approves Konover's request
to rezone 11.5 acres of land (primarily commercial and a small amount
residential) to the new ATGD. The approval allows a maximum of 90,000 sq. ft.
of commercial space in three to five buildings, the largest being a maximum of
75,000 sq. ft.
-- 2005: Konover no longer has an option to buy four
acres of land in this area, so reapplies for a new ATGD zone for the remaining
7.5 acres. The Zoning Commission approves this application, along with a site
plan for two commercial buildings: a two-story building of up to 62,000 sq.ft.
in size, and another between 2,500 sq.
ft. and 7,000 sq. ft. The combined size of the two buildings could be as much
as 64,500 sq. ft.
The ATGD regulation requires
that a master plan be submitted simultaneously with the zone change
application, specifying the locations, square footages, footprints, uses and
architectural elements of proposed buildings.
A more detailed site plan must then be approved within two years. If the
approved plan is not built, the land reverts back to its original zone.
The Collinsville Farmer’s Market, organized and
sponsored by C.A.R.E., opens its 3rd season on June 15 and will continue every
Sunday through mid-October (exact date TBA) from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. in the
Even more vendors will participate than last
summer, which was “hugely successful
for participating farmers, and many
Carol Gauger of Maple View Farm is among the
vendors at the market. Her husband Mark
is president of the Northwest Farmers Cooperative. Carol says, “I am a passionate advocate for
knowing about the food you eat. One of
the benefits of eating fresh, local produce is knowing where it came from and
how it was grown. I have been pleased to see the way the
Number of single family residences projected through
appraisal: 20-25 (figure of 20 used for analysis)
Number of children per household: 1.87
Fair Market Value of Single Family Home: $600,000
($420,000 assessment)
Property Taxes per household (29.92 mil rate): $12,567
Board of Selectman/Board of Finance Costs per household:
$3,152
Board of Education per household pupil cost (11,119 x 1.87):
$20,793
Total projected Town cost per household: $23,945
Total projected property tax revenue per household:
$12,567
Total projected loss per household: $11,378
Total town investment of open space acquisition: $509,000
Projected pay back period: 2.24 years
The Pedestrian and Vehicular Safety Committee, appointed in October 2006 by the Board
of Selectman in response to
The 677 surveys
respondents ranked their chief concerns (in order of importance) as: cars
speeding; cars not stopping at crosswalks; drivers not seeing pedestrians and
cyclists; other issues; pedestrians not using crosswalks; bicyclists not
obeying rules of the road, and too many crosswalks.
The committee’s many
recommendations include more in-street crosswalk signs, increased enforcement of
speeding and pedestrian laws, tree planting as a traffic-calming measure, and
better lighting to minimize light pollution and maximize visibility at
crosswalks.
Portions of
Architects’
association honors C.A.R.E.: C.A.R.E. is honored
to be the recipient of the 2006 American Institute of Architects, Connecticut
Chapter, Public Service Award. AIA Connecticut's Public Service Award is
presented biennially to an individual or organization that best
exhibits dedication to enhancing the built environment and educating the
public. C.A.R.E.'s mission, its efforts to encourage
AIA Connecticut is the
professional association for
Design Review standards adopted
into zoning regulations: the Zoning Commission in Sept. 2006 approved the adoption of a design
review regulation for non-residential development.
In a
thank-you letter to all those involved in creating the regulation (Selectmen,
zoning commissioners, and the Design Review Study Committee), C.A.R.E.
President
Members of the Design
Review Study Committee are: Committee Chairman and land planner Gary Hath,
developer and real estate agent Henry Bahre, businessman and commercial
property owner Joel Fried, land planner Gary Hath, home builder Frank Mairano,
architect Kent McCoy, financial planner Kristin Oswald, and recently-retired
Zoning Commission chairman and architect Chris Winsor.
At a March 2006 town
meeting,
Members of the Design Review Team will include one
member of the Zoning Commission, to be chosen by the commission, and four
members to be chosen by the Board of Selectmen. Those must include one licensed
architect, one person who is either a certified planner or licensed landscape
architect, and two members who are educated, trained or experienced in a
design-related field.
The Design Review Team
ordinance can be read on the home page of the town website, under the
announcement of the town meeting: www.townofcantonct.org
It
is clear that a large number of
In this way,
This type of regulation is not new or unusual.
We assume that we aren’t the only ones who are curious about which other
Since
Several towns that do include Avon,
A chief distinction between the types of regulations that different towns have adopted is whether the regulation applies only to new subdivisions, or to all lots, even existing ones, within a particular zone.
The town of
C.A.R.E. believes it should not be our community’s
goal to micro-regulate homeowners’ activities of likely negligible impact. However, C.A.R.E. does believe that
protection of
And,
finally, we thank commissioners for the time, care and concern you invest in
planning for
The builder of a house on High
Street’s “Spring Lot” (named for its natural
springs and historic springhouses) violated three conditions of his permit, the
Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency (IWWA) has determined.
In April 2006 the IWWA
ruled that builder Daniel Houlihan must remove a deck from the house at 30 High
St., cut off the deck supports at ground level, and leave the in-ground
supporting tubes in place (to avoid further wetlands disturbance that removing
the tubes would cause.)
And in May 2006, the
IWWA found that Mr. Houlihan installed a driveway that is about twice the size
of that approved, and ordered the removal of excess asphalt. The Agency also
determined that Mr. Houlihan installed water and sewer pipes to
However, in June 2006,
the IWWA voted to allow the sewer and water hook-ups to
High Street residents,
C.A.R.E. and Friends of Sweetheart Mountain wrote jointly to the Board of
Selectmen, criticizing the decision to allow the unapproved hook-ups and asking
Selectmen to improve the management of development projects.
The Collinsville
Historic District Commission has also found Mr. Houlihan removed springhouses
on the site without the commission’s authorization, and ordered him to rebuild
them.
Mr. Houlihan’s application was controversial from
the start because of the site’s wetlands, and neighbors lost a court appeal
when a judge ruled that the IWWA’s permit approval – which contained 21
conditions – would sufficiently address environmental concerns.
The approved plan
proposed one house and a detached accessory garage. Subsequent to receiving
IWWA approval, Mr. Houlihan sought and obtained from the town planner
authorization to split the lot in two (a “free cut” allowed by state statutes
in certain instances.) This split, however, created a circumstance that
regulations do not allow: an accessory building without a main dwelling. Mr.
Houlihan then took out a building permit from the land use office to convert
the garage into a house, and with Water Pollution Control Authority (WPCA) approval,
installed water and sewer pipes.
Mr. Houlihan’s lawyer,
David Markowitz, told IWWA members that the deck was built because of an
unintentional error made on a set of building plans, and that the sewer and
water hook-up occurred because “the builder’s intention changed after the
fact.” Mr. Markowitz pointed out that Mr. Houlihan obtained WPCA approval.
“This was not done in the cloak of darkness. I can’t tell you why he did it
without coming to the Agency.”
Some IWWA members said
they believed the violations were intentional. “It really is offensive,” said
member David Shepard. “Here’s a real flagrant violation; this is really
terrible,” said member Ed Evonsion. Member Larry Shine, who made the motion to
order the deck removed, said he did so “with respect to the credibility of this
Agency.”
The Connecticut Chapter of the American Planning Association (CCAPA) has awarded Canton Advocates for Responsible Expansion its 2005 Citizen Planner Award for C.A.R.E.'s "dedication to grass-roots planning, public education and activism."
CCAPA is the
CCAPA presents awards
annually, with the Citizen Planner Award going to a "citizen or group of
citizens working in a non-compensated capacity who has/have made a significant
contribution to planning."
C.A.R.E. Secretary Donna
Burkhardt and President Jane Latus accepted the award on Nov. 10 in
In an email to members,
Ms. Latus wrote, “While any recognition is gratifying, to have our work
acknowledged by a professional association is especially meaningful. This award
belongs to all of you: the C.A.R.E. members and supporters who have taken part
in this organization's work and accomplishments over the past five years. So,
congratulations to you, and thank you for staying engaged in your community.”
Approval of a housing development on
In executive sessions over the past year, the Planning
Commission and developer The Meehan Group negotiated a new subdivision proposal
for the mountain. Commissioners unanimously denied in Dec. 2003 The Meehan Group’s
application for a 61-home subdivision on this mountain in the
The
new negotiated plan, for 36 homes with individual septic systems and wells on
an extension of
After
learning from C.A.R.E. about the negotiations, residents packed a May 17 Board
of Selectmen meeting, spilling into the hall, to ask Selectmen to take the lead
in purchasing the mountain. Among residents messages to Selectmen were:
·
·
Tom Kutz: “Take
the leadership to find a way to buy the land. Ask for a commitment from Mr.
Meehan to allow time, and we’ll take out our checkbooks.”
In
a joint statement, Friends of Sweetheart Mountain, C.A.R.E. and the Farmington
River Watershed Association urged Selectmen to hold a referendum, predicting
residents will “put their money where their mountain is.”
Below
are excerpts from C.A.R.E. Vice President Susan Carr’s statement to the
Planning Commission on May 4.
“The
members of C.A.R.E., along with many other
“The
design appears to protect the east face of
“We
do understand that the executive sessions that took place to achieve this
current proposed settlement were legal, but it should be understandable why
many
“Looking
ahead, the confidence of Canton’s residents in the decisions you make NOW AND IN
THE FUTURE hinges on several absolutely critical things:
“1) The Commission needs to be 100% CERTAIN that the
developer’s representations to you about the plan are 100% binding on the
developer in every way legally possible.
The representations being made include:
·
The short
and long-term environmental impact of the subdivision during construction and
after completion;
·
The
near-term public access to open space and its eventual transfer to the Canton
Land Trust that’s been promised;
·
The tree
removal restrictions that the developer has taken great pains to spell out in
detail;
“2)
The Town needs to be 100% committed to enforcing the commitments being made. ….
the developer has made extensive representations about tree removal
restrictions that will need to be enforced over the very long-term, and it will
be incumbent upon the Town to be vigilant.
…
“3)
Perhaps most importantly … there must be TRANSPARENCY in this and all future
deliberations on matters that have proven to be so extremely important to all of
“If
… as Town zoning regulations currently
stand, such a development would not be possible outside of protracted,
negotiated settlements like this one … we emphasize once again that it is in
the Town’s interest – AND TO THE BENEFIT OF DEVELOPERS, AS WELL – that the Town
re-write its subdivision and zoning regulations to reflect in a PRO-ACTIVE way
the kind of development IT WANTS and IS SEEKING, and WHERE it wants it.”
Background:
In addition, the Farmington River Watershed
Association’s BioDiversity Project report gives the mountain the highest
possible rating for its biodiversity, one of only two such sites in
Mr.
Meehan first sought approval for 85 single-family, 3,000 sq. ft. houses on
half-acre lots. After being denied approval to extend septic service to the
entire area, he scaled back to 64, then 61 houses. Meanwhile, in Nov. 2003 the Zoning Commission
rezoned the mountain for two-acres lots (not affecting this application, but
future ones), and the Wetlands Agency rejected Mr. Meehan’s permit application.
Planning
Commissioners detailed their reasons for denial in an 11-page motion. They
noted that due to Wetlands Agency denial, the subdivision was impossible as
proposed. Additionally, they cited potential public safety hazards from sharply
curved, steep roads, and lack of faith in the stability and maintenance of
retaining walls that would have supported some roads. They also stated that
parts of the plan were incomplete or conflicting with plans shown to Wetlands.
C.A.R.E.
recognizes that land owners have the right to the reasonable use of their
property and that most subdivision applications, though occasionally unwelcome
by some residents for reasons ranging from loss of undeveloped land to the
cost of providing additional town services, nevertheless do meet the
requirements of the local zoning and subdivision regulations and, therefore,
must be approved.
However,
C.A.R.E. opposed this subdivision because it would have required
extensive manipulation of the topography of the mountain, in violation of
the town’s regulations; the amount and pattern of traffic generated by
this subdivision would have created potential safety problems on neighborhood
streets; and the proposed location of open space within the subdivision is
inconsistent with town policies that aim to create interconnected open space
systems.
Collins Ax Factory still on market:
In 2002: Developer
James “Rusty” Tilney – after years of negotiations with town boards and a
successful legal challenge against the prior owner’s last-minute decision to
back out of the sale, purchased the historic factory for $750,000 and received
approval to rezone and restore it.
2003: Mr.
Tilney put the factory complex up for sale, listing it with commercial realtor
CB Richard Ellis for $6.25 million. Mr. Tilney, an
2007: the
factory’s 20-plus buildings are still for sale, at an asking price of $8
million. Mr. Tilney has reportedly turned down several purchase offers. Mr. Tilney’s realtor, Julius Fialkiewicz of
Realty Works, said Mr. Tilney turned down offers that would have been harmful
to the property and town, and that three parties are currently interested in
the property.
The Collins factory, famous for
its sharp-edged tools such as snowplows and axes, closed in the 1960s and has
changed little since then. Its 28 buildings sit on 19 acres along the
His original plan of mixed
business, retail, restaurants and residences, would have been called “At
Collinsville.” The plan called for significant changes to the interiors of the
existing buildings, but only restoration of the exteriors.
Mr. Tilney’s proposal was widely welcomed by
residents, who saw it as a way to increase
“Shoppes” developer asks again; Zoning
Commission reverses vote. When
developers of The Shoppes at
In Jan. 2004, the Zoning
Commission denied the request to expand The Shoppes by 49,435 q. ft. to
accommodate Dick’s Sporting Goods. The developer re-applied on Feb. 13, asking
to add 48,565 sq. ft. and divide the complex’s easternmost building into two
buildings. The decision from the Commission on March 2 was “yes.”
The approval increased the
shopping center from the original 350,000 sq. ft., and a subsequently approved
372,000, to 429,000 sq. ft. (an overall 22% increase.) Nearby Simsbury Commons,
including Stop & Shop and Walgreen’s, is 290,000 sq. ft.
The developer asked the Zoning
Commission to “rush” the hearing, Town Planner Sarajane Pickett informed
commissioners at a Feb. 19 meeting.
Commission Chairman Chris Winsor told commissioners they "should
react to" the applicant’s request, and that the circumstances for the
request would be made known during the hearing.
The developers of The Shoppes at
S.R. Weiner Vice President of
Development Bob Frazier told Commissioners on March 2 that the developer is
under immediate time and financial deadlines in order to finish the complex
according to its desired schedule. He said the firm is committed to completing
the project, with or without this approval, and that the widespread belief
among town residents that the firm had threatened to leave the project
incomplete if not given this approval is not the case.
At the Jan. 29 meeting where the
Zoning Commission first rejected this request, commission Chairman Chris
Winsor, who voted to approve the application, said “it was regrettable” that a
prior Zoning Commission approval authorized a change to the west end of the
project, resulting in a loss of the original approval’s village-style design at
that end. He said the applicant now says the increase in square footage is
needed “to provide vitality” at the east end. “I think that’s probably a
correct statement,” he added.
Other commissioners said on Jan.
29 the requested increase was too big and that it would stray from the original
intent of a pedestrian-friendly complex:
-- Sandra Trionfini said
developers had assured the commission that the project would not get “mammoth.”
Now, she said, “All bets are off; anything can happen. At what point do we say,
‘No more’?”
-- Harvey Jassem said the
development already has the two anchors that the applicant sought, and that the
commission is not obligated to enlarge space for a third.
-- Jay Weintraub asked, “If this
project had been proposed to us on day one as it is proposed tonight, would we
have approved it? … For me, I don’t think I would have approved it.”
-- Kathy Hooker said the proposal
was not in keeping with the town’s master plan policy regarding town character,
and that she was uncomfortable adding more space, especially for use by one
large tenant.
-- Leesa Lawson said, “I feel
we’ve modified the integrity out of this project,” and added that she believes
the project will be viable without the addition.
-- Peter Clarke said that based on
the number of tenants who have signed leases, tenants “don’t appear to be
concerned that it’s not going to work.”
On March 2, however, Commissioners
had different opinions about the new application:
-- Chris Winsor said it met the
regulation’s requirements, and he complimented the developer for improving the
design.
-- Sandra Trionfini said that,
while prior changes may have steered the design away from the original intent,
this request seemed to be a natural progression
-- Jay Weintraub said the first
application seemed to be just a long building with too big a mass, but that
dividing the building and lowering the facade made the appearance conform with
the rest of the project.
-- Kathy Hooker said that the
buildings in the project “are all big boxes” and that the addition “isn’t
really going to be noticeable. It’s big already.”
-- Leesa Lawson, the one
commissioner to vote no, said the application had “come a long way” in its design
but that without a significantly smaller size request it was too much like the
recently-denied proposal. “We were adamant in January that this was a
significant size. Why would this be different?”
-- Alternate member Tom Chouinard
said the expansion would not be very noticeable.
-- Alternate
member Mark Podesla said the applicant had made an effort to improve the plan
and the size request was acceptable to him.
-- Glenn Barger,
who Chairman Winsor chose to sit out the vote, although Mr. Barger has more
seniority on the commission than Mr. Podesla, cautioned that 5 or 10 years down
the road, keeping buildings of this size occupied could be a concern.
-- Commissioners Harvey Jassem and
Peter Clarke were unable to attend the March 2 hearing. Mr. Jassem had asked Chairman Winsor to hold
the hearing one day later so that he could attend, but Mr. Winsor insisted that
the hearing be held on the 2nd.
Background
information:
In 1989, the town declined an
offer to purchase the golf course. The course was rezoned in 1998 at Mr.
Ellsworth’s request, from Agricultural/Residential to Special Business. Mr.
Ellsworth told the Zoning Commission he planned to build an athletic training
complex called The Peak Experience. Mr. Ellsworth subsequently stated he was
unable to obtain financing. Once rezoned, the 130-acre course remained rezoned.
The SB zone allows a wide array of uses. On March 31, 2003, course owners the
C.A.R.E., which formed after
the course was rezoned, regrets the town’s failure to buy the parcel and the
choice to rezone it. But given this set of circumstances, C.A.R.E. was pleased
by the developer’s stated intention to attempt a walkable project, of only one
quarter the size that regulations would allow, of multiple uses, and to
actively recruit locally-owned tenants. The developer’s multiple alterations,
however, have radically altered the project to one that is at odds with the
promised development and incompatible with the town of
The site plan initially approved
by Zoning included a west anchor store (Kohl's, now under construction) and an
east anchor store. Multiple smaller, individual buildings would have lined both
sides of a street connecting the two anchors. As part of the original approval,
the applicant stated an intent to create a “pedestrian-friendly” development.
No tenant had yet been identified for the east anchor, but the applicant stated
that a specialty foods store would be sought for that site. In 2003, the developer
received Zoning approval to combine several buildings into one 83,000 sq. ft.
building (next to Kohl's). The developer has since announced that Shaw's, the
northeast’s second largest grocery chain, will occupy this building.
The originally approved
application called for mixed uses, including retail, restaurant, office and an
executive training golf course. W/S Development now says it has determined that
an executive golf course will not be profitable and is instead weighing other
possible recreational uses, such as batting cages or miniature golf.