|
Norwich — The current City Council will finish its term this November dealing with the most controversial
issue of its tenure, a proposed zone change along Washington Street to convert seven properties from residential to neighborhood
commercial as a prelude to a proposed commercial development.
The controversy packed the City Council
Chambers Monday even though city officials let it be known that there would be no discussion or comments allowed on the emotional
issue. The overflow crowd spilled into the hallway, and a city fire marshal counted those who left and allowed the same number
people enter the room to replace them. Anyone who left could not be assured re-entry.
The council's only action Monday was to
schedule the public hearing and potential vote for Nov. 19 — the last regular meeting of the sitting council before
newcomers elected Nov. 6 take office on Dec. 3.
“Lame duck,” resident Brad Wall
yelled from the audience. “It will be a lame duck session.”
But it's possible that the new City
Council might end up handling the controversial issue despite the current schedule. The zone change first must be referred
to the Commission on the City Plan for a recommendation. The item is not on tonight's planning commission agenda.
Unless it holds a special meeting, the planning
commission does not meet again until Nov. 20 — one day after the council hearing. Without a recommendation from the
commission, the council could not vote on the measure.
The planning commission's recommendation
is important, because if the commission recommends against the zone change, the council would need a two-thirds majority vote
to approve it.
•••
Debate on the zone-change proposal has dominated
the fall campaign season and led to renewed calls for the City Council to give up its dual role as the city's zoning commission.
That move would require a charter change sent to the voters for approval.
As aldermen, members of the council are
used to seeking out residents' opinions, opening their mail and listening to debates on radio talk shows. As zoning officers,
those same aldermen, however, are not allowed to discuss issues outside the public hearing and evidence entered into the official
record at the hearing. They shouldn't discuss the topic outside the deliberations that follow the hearing.
Yet several incumbents and council candidates
accepted campaign donations from neighbors and at least one business owner opposed to the controversial zone change.
Based on court past court cases, zoning-change
applications are limited to the zone change itself, not any proposed development that might occur if the neighborhood commercial
zone is approved.
When they announced they had applied for
the zone change, developers Carpionato-LaBossiere Properties LLC also announced plans for a $9 million, three-building commercial
complex that would include a national chain pharmacy, a local bank and a national coffee shop.
That specific project has been at the center
of the debate, as opponents question tax figures and fear local pharmacies — including Utley & Jones Pharmacy a
block away — would be put out of business by the new project.
And anyone who drives along Washington Street, where the zone change is proposed, cannot miss the giant plywood signs advocating for or against the zone change.
The signs also give mixed messages on the
benefits of the proposed project.
•••
On the financial side, the two camps offer
very divergent tax calculations on the project. Carpionato-LaBossiere estimated the project would bring in $175,000 in “additional
annual tax revenue for the city.”
However, Santo “John” Grillo,
president of Utley & Jones Pharmacy, sent a three-page tax calculation analysis to every member of the City Council last
week. Grillo calculated the values of a coffee shop, bank branch and chain pharmacy using comparable development elsewhere
in Norwich and in other towns.
He subtracted the loss of $28,000 in tax
revenue if an estimated eight houses on the existing properties were demolished and then figured the loss of another $19,000
by anticipating neighbors of the new plaza would seek value reductions in their homes through the Board of Assessment Appeals.
Grillo concluded that the real tax benefit
would be $33,000 per year, and members of the neighborhood coalition translated that into $1.19 per taxpayer using the current
city tax rate and the total tax revenue the city generates each year.
The financial implications, though, would
not be part of the Nov. 19 hearing, as they pertain to the specific development project, not the neighborhood zone change
application. | 