There was an article in today's CtPost regarding the OSPlan. As is my custom to comment on media reports in this blog, I reference the online article by hyperlink, but as they often become stale, I cut/paste with my comments.
http://www.connpost.com/ci_11257354
Commissioners spar on open space issue
By KATE RAMUNNI Staff writer
Article Last Updated: 12/17/2008 10:28:04 PM EST
SHELTON -- The Planning and Zoning Commission will meet with the Conservation Commission about the proposed draft of the city's Open Space Plan, a decision that came after two commissioners butted heads over one aspect of the plan.
If approved, the draft would be incorporated in the zoning commission's Plan of Conservation and Development. But the one controversial aspect of the plan -- increasing open space subdivision set aside requirements from 10 to 15 percent -- would only be implemented if it were changed in the zoning regulations.
++ The Open Space Plan is a supplement to the 2006 Plan of Conservation & Development and thus seeks to reinforce it's guidance to the Planning & Zoning Commission. In the Plan of Conservation & Development (adopted 2006/Jul/11, Commissioner Sylvester was in office but did not vote on the plan, yes or no, not sure why), page 3-3 states: "As these 4,500 acres of unprotected land are developed, not only will the 34% ratio of actual and perceived open space diminish, but the 14% ratio of dedicated open space to committed land as well. To maintain this ratio as the remaining developable land becomes committed land, Shelton should consider increasing the amount of open space to be set aside in new subdivisions from 10% to 15%." It is also the 1st item of recomended open space strategies on page 3-8. The Open Space Plan is simply reinforcing that direction, and asking that the Planning & Zoning Commission amend the subdivision regulations to implement that adopted principal. ++
The issue led to an angry outburst by Conservation Commission Chairman Tom Harbinson, who hurled accusations at Zoning Commissioner Leon J. Sylvester after Sylvester raised the set aside issue.
++ As the public hearing was closed on this application, I had to sit on my hands and watch Commissioner Sylvester say he 1) wanted to approve the document, 2) not wanting to be held accountable to following a plan have a "disclaimer" that they weren't approving every item in the document, 3) couldn't identify what he didn't like specifically because he hadn't read the plan beyond the Executive Summary. You can read their minutes starting on p.6 All this while I was realizing that I spent 2yrs on the committee which prepared the Plan of Conservation & Development, and nobody was paying attention to it's guidance as mentioned above. I was angry, and admit that I should have presented myself during the public portion of the meeting (which now occur at the end) in a more diplomatic way. ++
Last month at a public hearing on the draft, attorney Stephen Bellis, representing the Shelton Builders Association, told the zoning commission that it was his belief that state statute caps such set asides at 10 percent, so to require more would go against state law. The association opposed the increase, Bellis said, and would consider a court challenge should it be fully implemented in the zoning regulations.
++ This was refuted during the public hearing when Atty Bellis spoke. As clear example: Bethel 10%, Bridgewater 15%, Brookfield 15%, Danbury 5% to 20%, New Fairfield 20%, New Milford 15%, Newtown 15%, Redding 10%, Ridgefield 10%, Sherman 15%. Read an email response from the Town of Greenwich which has never been challenged on their regulations of 15% set aside. ++
Because of that, Sylvester said he wanted to have more discussion on that proposed increase. But, Sylvester said, he supported the plan draft and made a motion to approve it with the caveat that the PZC would further discuss the set aside issue.
++ This is an strategy of the City's adopted Plan of Conservation & Development. This Open Space Plan is reinforcing that strategy. The strategy is not IMPLEMENTED until the Planning & Zoning Commission reviews and then possibly changes their subdivision regulations. ++
That enraged Harbinson, who said it made no sense to pass a plan when questions about it still lingered. He also criticized Sylvester for not reading the entire plan before the meeting.
++ As mentioned above. There should be no "questions" about the 15% set-aside strategy already adopted by the PZC. This was confirmed as allowed by Assistant Corporate Counsel Ray Sous on Nov26 ++
But Sylvester said he only received a copy of the report shortly before the meeting. The copy he initially received two weeks ago he gave to another commissioner who hadn't gotten one, he said, and only got the second copy this week. He said he did read the parts that summarized its contents. Not only that, but he is in favor of approving the draft, he said.
++ The OSPlan is available to the public since Aug2008. Formally turned to the PZ staff on Sep17 to allow ample review time, articles appeared in CtPost on Sep19, letter to editor on Sep21, promoted on City website homepage starting Sep22, 8-24 referral made to BOA on Oct29, public hearing held Nov25, and yet on Dec9 - this former Chairman of the P&Z, who is retired, had not read the plan. This shows a deriliction of duty in my opinion. I think it important to bring that to the attention of the public. ++
"I read thoroughly the executive summary and the overview, and I am thoroughly familiar with the plan and totally supportive," he said. "I am only thinking of looking for a notation that the board would move on that issue in the near future."
++ Both can't be done in the same breath. You can't approve a plan on the exhale, while saying you hold "notation" over any item on the inhale. ++
That didn't satisfy Harbinson, who angrily told the commission he would rather the plan be tabled than approved with any caveats.
++ Only two commissioners spoke up to question such an "empty" approval with undefined disclaimers ++
It's not the first time the two have clashed, something Sylvester said he doesn't understand. "Mr. Harbinson obviously has some personal anger with me -- he has a personal or political objection with everything I do," Sylvester said.
++ Perhaps Commissioner Sylvester forgets our NOVEMBER 2008 joint meeting for a CtPost article attempting to draw attention to the recreational component of the canal's FERC license? We met together with the reporter and it resulted in a complementary article where we were photographed together. I do NOT have a personal issue with Leon. I do NOT have political objection with everything he does. That said, I did take issue with Commissioner Sylvester at the same meeting for not fully recusing himself with explanation for a refuse processing application in which his son-in-law is a partner. If you recuse yourself due to a conflict of interest, you MUST state what that conflict is. This is different than simply abstaining from a vote, which anyone can do for any reason and without explanation under the Roberts Rules of Order. Due to his wifes real-estate vocation, Commissioner Sylvester has frequent conflicts for which he does not fully state the reason for such conflict. I believe the public have a right to know why that happens, and the frequency to which it happens.++
"My motion was to pass the plan and just to make a notation that I was thinking the commission should have further discussions about the taking of greater percentages of open space. "I don't have any idea why he got so upset," Sylvester said.
++ That closing comment, is not what the record shows. Commissioner Sylvester NEVER made any motion on the record to pass the Open Space Plan. Only when Chairman Pagoda asked if anyone had any comments did Commissioner Sylvester start into his thoughts. Sad to see such a spin of the truth. ++
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Friday, December 12, 2008
NHReg article on adoption of OSPlan
On TueDec9 the Planning and Zoning Commission met and on the agenda was possible adoption of the Open Space Plan. The NHRegister had an article, which I cut/paste with my comments as is custom for this blog.
http://nhregister.com/articles/2008/12/11/news/valley/b6-shopen.txt
Thursday, December 11, 2008 6:03 AM EST
By Sarah W. Caron, Register Correspondent
SHELTON — An angry exchange between city officials at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting Tuesday followed the tabling of a vote on the proposed update to the Open Space Plan.
The update would change the city’s goal for open space from 10 percent of land in the city to 15 percent. However, PZC member Leon Sylvester, who said he had not yet read the draft document, which was completed by the Conservation Commission in August, expressed concerns that other items in the document might later cause problems for the PZC. He favored approving the document in theory, though not giving it a full and formal approval.
++ To be clear on the obfuscation attempted by Commissioner Sylvester in the same breath: 1) he wanted to approve the document, 2) with concern over items in the document that might hold the PZC accountable to following a plan, he didn't want to give it full and formal approval (an approval of theory?), 3) and yet he hadn't even read the plan.++
“I think 15 percent hangs over my head as that is the recommendation and I think that should be debated. ... I am not trying to thwart the plan. I am just trying to put some sort of disclaimer in here that would protect the (planning) board,” Sylvester said.
++ The PZC's own Plan of Conservation & Development calls for an increase in percentage of Open Space acreage preservation achievement, and to increase the open space set-aside in every residential subdivision application. (p.3-8) This was approved by the PZC several years ago, and Commissioner Sylverster sat on that board and voted to approve that plan. The OSPlan is a supplement to build upon, reinforce and does not change those previously stated, accepted, and adopted principles of the PZC.++
The remarks met with criticism from Conservation Commission Chairman Tom Harbinson, who attended the meeting. "I am a little disappointed that after two months some members of the commission haven’t read it,” said Harbinson, looking at Sylvester. “I just received it. I think that is very unfair,” Sylvester replied. “At the last meeting I asked for a copy. When I got it, I gave it over to someone else, trying to do the right thing. ... This ... it’s ridiculous to argue this.”
++ I'm upset by 1) The facts mentioned in the earlier paragraph that there is an already adopted and accepted goal by the PoC&D which the OSPlan is seeking to reinforce, all of which a long time Commissioner such as Mr. Sylvester should be intimately aware of. 2) The OSPlan was provided to the public via the City website during August of 2008. It was formally forwarded to the PZC on Sep17 so that there would be ample time given to review it, publicity was generated for the plan via a CtPost article on Sep19, a CtPost letter to the editor on Sep21, a prominent link on the front page of the City website on Sep22, a 8-24 referral to the BOA on Oct29, all of which was promotion for comment toward a public hearing held on Nov25 to hear comments for the record. During that Nov25 meeting the public hearing was closed, and the PZC had some discussion which led to having the matter tabled to this mtg 2 weeks later on Dec9. Mr. Sylvester is retired, has had several months to review the plan, and has the audacity to say "he just received it" and I'm being "unfair". The record speaks for itself, and it is ridiculous for him to argue with the record of facts. The public record should be more open and transparent about the record of fact, and my comments were accomplishing that - which is what I suspect was the root to what upset Commissioner Sylvester. ++
The update will allow the Conservation Commission to apply for grants to purchase more open land.
++ The CC has no active land acquisition grants, but there are other grants such as trails enhancement grants from the DEP and others, where the OSPlan is a reference document. Updating the OSPlan from a 1990's document is important to be successful on such applications. ++
Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman Anthony Pagota favored a sit-down with the Conservation Commission, to go over points of the draft plan and “see where they are coming from. What their definition is and what our definition is may be a little different.”
The commission voted to table the matter until its Jan. 13 meeting. In the meantime, the document is expected to be reviewed by the panel.
++ The CC is always available to dialogue with other agencies of the City of Shelton (as well as other communities) regarding our thoughts on Open Space conservation and preservation. Improving communication can only be positive. I'm disappointed with myself in how I presented my opinions at the PZC mtg of Dec9. I could and should have been more diplomatic in tone, but I do stand behind the content of what the CC is attempting to achieve. It is simply the reinforcement and support of planning documents the PZC has already accepted, reviewed and adopted. ++
http://nhregister.com/articles/2008/12/11/news/valley/b6-shopen.txt
Thursday, December 11, 2008 6:03 AM EST
By Sarah W. Caron, Register Correspondent
SHELTON — An angry exchange between city officials at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting Tuesday followed the tabling of a vote on the proposed update to the Open Space Plan.
The update would change the city’s goal for open space from 10 percent of land in the city to 15 percent. However, PZC member Leon Sylvester, who said he had not yet read the draft document, which was completed by the Conservation Commission in August, expressed concerns that other items in the document might later cause problems for the PZC. He favored approving the document in theory, though not giving it a full and formal approval.
++ To be clear on the obfuscation attempted by Commissioner Sylvester in the same breath: 1) he wanted to approve the document, 2) with concern over items in the document that might hold the PZC accountable to following a plan, he didn't want to give it full and formal approval (an approval of theory?), 3) and yet he hadn't even read the plan.++
“I think 15 percent hangs over my head as that is the recommendation and I think that should be debated. ... I am not trying to thwart the plan. I am just trying to put some sort of disclaimer in here that would protect the (planning) board,” Sylvester said.
++ The PZC's own Plan of Conservation & Development calls for an increase in percentage of Open Space acreage preservation achievement, and to increase the open space set-aside in every residential subdivision application. (p.3-8) This was approved by the PZC several years ago, and Commissioner Sylverster sat on that board and voted to approve that plan. The OSPlan is a supplement to build upon, reinforce and does not change those previously stated, accepted, and adopted principles of the PZC.++
The remarks met with criticism from Conservation Commission Chairman Tom Harbinson, who attended the meeting. "I am a little disappointed that after two months some members of the commission haven’t read it,” said Harbinson, looking at Sylvester. “I just received it. I think that is very unfair,” Sylvester replied. “At the last meeting I asked for a copy. When I got it, I gave it over to someone else, trying to do the right thing. ... This ... it’s ridiculous to argue this.”
++ I'm upset by 1) The facts mentioned in the earlier paragraph that there is an already adopted and accepted goal by the PoC&D which the OSPlan is seeking to reinforce, all of which a long time Commissioner such as Mr. Sylvester should be intimately aware of. 2) The OSPlan was provided to the public via the City website during August of 2008. It was formally forwarded to the PZC on Sep17 so that there would be ample time given to review it, publicity was generated for the plan via a CtPost article on Sep19, a CtPost letter to the editor on Sep21, a prominent link on the front page of the City website on Sep22, a 8-24 referral to the BOA on Oct29, all of which was promotion for comment toward a public hearing held on Nov25 to hear comments for the record. During that Nov25 meeting the public hearing was closed, and the PZC had some discussion which led to having the matter tabled to this mtg 2 weeks later on Dec9. Mr. Sylvester is retired, has had several months to review the plan, and has the audacity to say "he just received it" and I'm being "unfair". The record speaks for itself, and it is ridiculous for him to argue with the record of facts. The public record should be more open and transparent about the record of fact, and my comments were accomplishing that - which is what I suspect was the root to what upset Commissioner Sylvester. ++
The update will allow the Conservation Commission to apply for grants to purchase more open land.
++ The CC has no active land acquisition grants, but there are other grants such as trails enhancement grants from the DEP and others, where the OSPlan is a reference document. Updating the OSPlan from a 1990's document is important to be successful on such applications. ++
Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman Anthony Pagota favored a sit-down with the Conservation Commission, to go over points of the draft plan and “see where they are coming from. What their definition is and what our definition is may be a little different.”
The commission voted to table the matter until its Jan. 13 meeting. In the meantime, the document is expected to be reviewed by the panel.
++ The CC is always available to dialogue with other agencies of the City of Shelton (as well as other communities) regarding our thoughts on Open Space conservation and preservation. Improving communication can only be positive. I'm disappointed with myself in how I presented my opinions at the PZC mtg of Dec9. I could and should have been more diplomatic in tone, but I do stand behind the content of what the CC is attempting to achieve. It is simply the reinforcement and support of planning documents the PZC has already accepted, reviewed and adopted. ++
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
