This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
02/07/2019 11:00 PMA public hearing over proposed zoning changes that would allow for the possible construction of an indoor recreation complex in Clinton’s I-2 zones drew speakers from all sides of the issue.
Close to 100 people crowded into the Green Room at Town Hall on Feb. 4 to attend the Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) public hearing. Based on comments made, the majority attended due to the possibility of an indoor sports facility on the property of 30 Old Post Road, the source of an earlier application for a recycling facility that drew intense opposition in 2018.
The petition to change the regulations called for changes to the size limit allowed for the property and to allow for a special exception in the zone area. A special exception is needed because an indoor recreational sports facility is allowed only in the I-1 Zone, not in the I-2 zone where the property is located.
The petition was submitted by developer Old Post Road Realty (OPRR), the owners of the property and the owners responsible for the recycling facility application. PZC Chairperson Mary Ellen Dahlgren and the PZC’s attorney, Ken Slater, explained that even if the amendment was approved, a developer would still need to come forward with an application and more public hearings would be held.
The public hearing on the zone change petition was closed on Feb. 4; the commission is expected to vote to approve or deny the petition at its regular meeting on Monday, Feb. 11.
At the public hearing 20 people spoke, five of whom were in favor of the petition, seven in opposition, and eight who were neutrals.
Economic Development Commission Chairman John Allen spoke in support of the changes. Allen noted that his comments were in favor of the zoning changes, and not an endorsement of a specific proposal, which Allen said would need to be considered on its own merit.
Allen said an indoor recreation complex would have “ a relatively low impact on the environment, while providing a venue for recreation to resident of Clinton and neighboring towns as well.”
Ken Skidmore called an indoor sports complex “a large, passionate need in town,” and cited the loss of the gym at the Pierson school as a blow to space availability for youth sports. Other speakers noted a development could help bring visitors to town and keep Clinton families from traveling and spending money in other towns that have similar facilities.
Speakers against the amendments pointed to possible unintended consequences of changing the zoning, mistrust of the developers and commission, and the effect the change could have on adjacent properties as reasons to deny.
Resident Vincent Cimino called the propose change “a blanket change in zoning for a reason that was unforeseen.”
“Anyone who bought a property in the I-2 Zone knew what the uses were,” he said.
Phil Sengle, who said he was speaking for himself and not for the Board of Selectmen on which he serves, said “this is a tough situation, and not a black and white one.”
Sengle pointed out that the developers behind the amendment had previously engage the town in litigation, “and may not hesitate to do so again.”
Resident James Connolly chastised the PZC for what he called giving the developers “a fast track” to get an application approved.
“This makes an entire mockery of zoning,” he said.
As he walked back to sit down, Connolly told the audience “It’s all in the bag, it’s all been decided folks.”
Resident Kirk Carr voiced a concern that the application was a legal maneuver by the developers to show that the town had engaged in contract zoning, an illegal practice in Connecticut, that would allow OPRR to sue the town and pursue the waste recycling plant again.
Slater explained that contract zoning occurs when a developer tells a town it agrees to build a desired development if the town agrees to rezone a district. Slater said he was not worried that the PZC’s actions would allow for that charge to be made.
Some speakers became angry that the commission gaveled down those who wished to speak about the 30 Old Post Road property in particular, or the previous application for the waste recycling facility by OPRR. Dahlgren said speakers must keep their comments to the text of the proposed zoning change only.
After the public was done speaking, PZC member Gary Bousquet addressed allegations that the PZC was driving forward the application by explaining that the commission was just following the established process.
“Everyone has that legal right to come us,” Bousquet said.
OPRR representative Joanne Wiley was in attendance at the meeting but declined comment for this story.
The petition to amend the zoning regulations was an expected move after a December 2018 PZC meeting at which Old Post Road Realty owners Douglas and Kenneth Dobriner came before the commission to informally discuss their intentions to build an indoor recreational sports center on the property. At that meeting, the Dobriners said that such a facility might include a combination of a skating rink, indoor soccer fields, and related businesses such as a pro shop.
The interest in building an indoor sports facility has been previously discussed in Clinton. There has been interest in building a facility at the vacant Unilever headquarters site near the train station, but plans have yet to progress. In 2013, the town also disbursed a $200,000 grant to Shoreline Ice, LLC, to conduct a feasibility study to build an ice rink at the former dump site on Old Nod Road; that effort also failed.
The petition is the latest development in a years-long saga over a possible development at 30 Old Post Road.
In 2015 Shoreline Rail and Recycling LLC (SRR) proposed to construct a 94,000 square-foot industrial recycling facility on the property. At that time, members of the homeowner’s association of Founders Village, the condominium complex located across the railroad tracks from the proposed facility, filed a lawsuit to halt all construction on the site. The case was eventually dismissed and an updated application was resubmitted in early 2018.
At three public hearings on the application before the Inland Wetlands Commission (IWC), no member of the public spoke in favor of the application, while dozens spoke against the proposal. Members of the public expressed concerns about the potential contamination to wetlands on the property, safety concerns, and health issues associated with the debris that could be processed at the site.
SRR withdrew its application in May 2018, after several member of the IWC indicated they were leaning toward voting “No” on the application at the commission’s next meeting. That June, SRR submitted a new application before the IWC, only to once again withdraw the application in early August, after the PZC passed a zoning amendment that would prohibit the type of use that the proposed facility would have engaged in. Soon after, the developers challenged the PZC amendment in State Superior Court in Middletown. In October, Old Post Realty filed a motion to withdraw its appeal, which was granted by a judge on Dec. 10.