The Economic Development Commission held a special meeting on Tuesday, January 30, 2007 at the Multi-Purpose Building, Riverside Road, Sandy Hook, CT. Chairman Chet Hopper called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m.
PRESENT: Chet Hopper, Robert Rau, Tom Long, Theodore Kreinik, Kim Danziger, Robert Morey, Joseph Hemingway, Brian Aumueller ALSO PRESENT: Conservation Commission members Joseph Hovious, Pat Barkman, and Marj Cramer, one member of the public
ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES: Chairman Hopper corrected a statement by Community Development Director Elizabeth Stocker in response to Sara Middeleer to read “the zoning for the Tech Park is the same as Commerce Road. The Economic Development Commission has been appointed as the Agency for the Tech Park and as such can dictate the land use covenants that will likely be more narrow than the zoning. The Commission will target mid-sized companies compatible with two (2) acre zoning. Mr. Long added to Old Business, Tech Park “to review discussion of the project”. Upon motion of Mr. Hemingway, the minutes of the regular meeting of 1/16/07 were unanimously accepted with corrections.
COMMUNICATIONS: Joseph Borst has informed the Commission that Ridgefield has a marketing blitz program underway. Robert Casella is in charge of the program.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Conservation Commissioner Pat Barkman asked if Plan 3A had been approved for the configuration of the Tech Park and the Open Space parcel. Mr. Danzinger said he will bring everyone up to speed when he makes his presentation later in the meeting. Ms.
Barkman asked if a specific plan had been approved and Mr. Danzinger replied yes.
REPORTS: None
OLD BUSINESS:
Tech Park: Mr. Danziger presented the approved plan which is Plan 2. He explained the background of how the land was obtained from the state. Both the Economic Development land and the Open Space land were given through legislation. The Economic Development land must be used for that purpose or the land will return to the state. Consideration was given to the POCD, the various Commissions and the Board of Selectmen. The Board of Selectmen required a through road which would not be possible with Plan 3A. There is also legislation for a through road for the farmers on the state’s agricultural land. All Commissions signed off on proposal #2. Conservation Chairman Joe Hovious stated that this is not the proposal the Open Space Task Force approved (now the
Conservation Commission). Mr. Danziger indicated that nothing has been changed. The legislation is broad enough that adjustments can be made. Mr. Long asked if there are guidelines. Mr. Danziger said they are very broad, economic development to the west and open space to the east. Mary Wilson (address not given) asked if the open space acreage remains the same. Mr. Danziger replied that it does, 34.4 acres for open space.
Mr Danziger proceeded with his presentation explaining the advantage to attract businesses is that the Economic Development Commission will have the requirements worked out and will be able to speed up the permit process. The Commission can set the parameters. Marj Cramer stated that no one has thought outside of the box. The property could be used for energy sources that would cut taxes. Market studies should be done.
Mr. Danziger explained one concept would be to have a secondary meandering brook which could be a source of heat. Ms. Barkman asked if the brook would be on the open space. Mr. Danziger said it hadn’t been determined. Ms. Barkman asked if everything that was to be developed would be on the economic development land. Mr. Danziger said there are no regulations for water. Ms. Barkman stated the open space should be preserved and not have water on it. Mr. Danziger said the plans are not that far along. The biological and historical studies have just been done. There is also a possibility of piping water across the bridge to the east side creating an agricultural pond that the farmer could pump from. An easement from the
state would be needed.
Mr. Long asked if a 100 ft. buffer zone is required. Mr. Hopper replied that there is no legislation requirement. The Commission can make the rules, get the permits and control the playing field. Mr. Hovious asked if the companies would be required to go to the Inland-Wetlands Commission. Mr. Danziger said yes companies will go to all the required commissions, however EDC will do work ahead for the sites. Mr. Hovious said he sees a lot of disagreeing in advance from the other commissions. Mr. Aumueller stated that setting the parameters leads to debate ahead of time but allows the Commission to cherry pick the tenants.
Mr. Kreinik asked what the purpose of tonight’s meeting was. Mr. Hopper said it was to bring the Commission up to speed and decide how to proceed. The Commission needs a starting point. Mr. Danziger said the Commission needs to reconcile the technical data with the engineer’s drawings before they go before the various commissions.
Mr. Hovious said he was on the Open Space Task Force and their minutes reflect the EDC had four (4) configurations and the Task Force voted for a different configuration. He spoke with Inland Wetlands Chairman, Sally O’Neil and she said they approved configuration 3A. He spoke with Elizabeth Stocker in April of 2005 and she indicated pushing back changes for development to the stream. Map #2 does not take into consideration what the Open Space Task Force wanted. Mr. Danziger stated that what Inland Wetlands preferred was in fact 3A. The Board of Selectmen required a through road and the POCD had to be followed for an east-west road corridor.
Mr. Hopper said subcommittees will include other commissions. EDC’s main purpose is to develop the property to make money for the town from good taxpayers. The market would be limited because of restrictions that EDC will have in place. The Commission is sensitive to the environment and to the M-5 zoning.
Mr. Kreinik asked the Conservation Commission members if they are in favor of any economic development on the Tech Park land. Ms.Cramer said economic development does not have to be one thing. The property could be used for solar windmills and generating ponds. Mr. Kreinik said the EDC is looking for low impact development. Everyone should be under the same assumption that we will have development. Mr. Hovious stated that he did know how the land was given. Mr. Kreinik asked that they please note that the environment is being taken into consideration. Mr. Hemingway indicated that the Commission had not had time to review the latest reports. Mr. Long said the Commission needs to review the draft documents and then
they can be shared.
Mr. Hopper informed the Commission that the Stormwater report has just been received with more details and the Conservation Official, Rob Sibley will be reviewing the new report. Mr. Kreinik wants to get additional information from the engineer on the different standards used in his report.
Mr. Hovious asked if the Open Space parcel is staying where it is. Mr. Danziger said nothing is set in stone. Ms. Barkman said the amount of buildings have escalated and no one is listening to the Conservation Commission. Mr. Danziger said the number of buildings has remained at 10 and could be fewer if a company requires more land. Mr. Hovious said that the Conservation Commission wants to control their open space.
Mr. Hopper indicated the road was a problem to put through and narrowed the options. The engineer looked at utilizing the land and the lots have to be on a road.
Ms. Cramer said that the parcel is divided fifty-fifty and a coalition should be formed for efficiency. Mr. Aumueller indicated that the parcels were switched to utilize the parameters.
Mr. Hemingway feels the Commission needs a plan before they go to the various commissions not during the planning stage. Mr. Aumueller said there is room for input from everyone. It is a very flexible plan.
Mr. Kreinik moved to invite 2 members from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Inland-Wetlands Commission and the Conservation Commission to EDCs next Tech Park meeting to solicit input and review reports as they affect their commissions. Motion seconded. Roll call vote: YES - Mr. Kreinik, Mr. Morey, Mr. Hopper, Mr. Aumueller NO- Mr. Long, Mr. Rau, Mr. Hemingway, Mr. Danziger. Motion failed. After further discussion, it was decided to form a Steering Committee after the next meeting at which the members can get answers from the engineer.
Mr. Hemingway moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded. After discussion, a roll call vote was taken. YES – Mr. Hemingway, Mr. Danziger NO – Mr. Aumueller, Mr. Morey, Mr. Hopper, Mr. Kreinik, Mr. Long, Mr. Rau. Motion failed.
After a discussion of the M-5 zoning, it was decided that Mr. Kreinik, Mr. Rau and Mr. Morey will serve on a research committee to review the zoning options for the Tech Park.
The next regular scheduled meeting will be held on February 20, 2007. The next Tech Park meeting will be held on March 6, 2007.
Mr. Hemingway moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
Mary Kelley, Clerk
| 
