Norwich Neighborhoods

Article posted 12/18

CAN THE PLAN!
BYRON BROOK
Site Plan
CDPP Color map
Contact Can the Plan Committee
State Committee Contacts
Contact the City Council
Can the Plan Articles
Pictures of Hansen, Scotland and Whiteplains Rd
More Hansen/Scotland and Whiteplains pics
Home
Washington Street Overlay/Rezone

Condo developer to appeal rejection

185-unit plan knocked down by Norwich

By Claire Bessette

   Published on 12/18/2008

 
 

Norwich - Norwichtown Development LLC will appeal Tuesday's planning commission denial of the firm's controversial proposal to build a 185-unit active-adult community condominium complex on Scotland, Hansen and White Plains roads.

Hours before the Commission on the City Plan voted against the project, the developer had served city officials with its appeal to New London Superior Court seeking reversal of the city Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Commission's denial of the project Dec. 4.

Attorney David Sherwood, who represents Norwichtown Development LLC and property owners Thomas and Colleen Abele, said Wednesday he will file an appeal against the planning commission once the denial is published officially.

Just prior to the hearing Tuesday, Sherwood submitted a letter to the planning commission asking that all five members recuse themselves and that the City Council appoint five new “neutral” members to hear the application. He claimed the commission's vote in October to support the City Council's application to declare the land involved to be rural on the state map - preventing the project from receiving sewer service - showed they were against the project before the hearing even started.

The commission refused his request and also refused his request to question them about prior conversations and potential prejudgments they had against the project.

After a public hearing Tuesday, the commission rejected Sherwood's request to keep the hearing open to allow him to present more information at the next session and voted unanimously to deny permits for the project.

”I think that the plan conforms to the regulations, and the commission should have recused themselves and allowed substitute members to be appointed,” Sherwood said Wednesday.

Peter Davis, director of planning and development, said his office received a copy of the wetlands appeal Wednesday. And in anticipation of receiving the second appeal soon, Davis said he could not comment on Sherwood's claims.

The lawsuit against the wetlands commission cites similar reasons for the appeal, along with technical claims that the project met with city and state regulations. The project would have had only “insignificant and short-term impacts on inland wetlands and watercourses,” the suit said, and it had received permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the state Department of Environmental Protection.