Click here for Minutes from December 11, 2001
Click here for Minutes from January 8, 2002
Click here for Minutes from Feburary 12, 2002
Click here for Minutes from March 12, 2002
Click here for Minutes from April 9, 2002
Click here for Minutes from May 14, 2002
Click here for Minutes from June 11, 2002

JULY 9, 2002
* These minutes were accepted but not approved by the Commission

ATTENDANCE: Stephen A. Thomas, Chairman; Dennis J. Santella, Frank T.

STAFF: Michael Greene, Director of Planning and Zoning; Dori

OTHERS: Residents of Norwalk and Rowayton: Mr. Koproski,

CALL TO ORDER

The Chairman opened the meeting at 7:17 p.m.

The roll was called and six members were present.

PUBLIC HEARING - #3527 – ALEXANDER KOPROSKI – 317 ELY AVENUE/INGALLS AVENUE – 3 LOTS

The Public Hearing was opened by the Chairman at 7:20 p.m. The Chairman asked the secretary to read the legal notice for the record.

Mr. Greene stated that Attorney Waters was unavailable for this hearing on behalf of Mr. Koproski, therefore, the owner would be representing himself.

Mr. Koproski restated his intention to subdivide the property and what he proposed to add to enhance it as well. The Chairman opened the meeting to the public for comment.

Ms. Howell, 11 Ryan Avenue, stated her property abuts the Ely Avenue portion of Mr. Koproski’s lot. She stated that safety for the children is a concern due to Ely School. She further stated the environment has been disturbed. When the land was cleared, all the trees were taken down. There are no trees to shade the existing homes that are on the South side of this property. She asked that trees be added when the property is completed. She also stated that a sidewalk needs to be in place for the small children. She asked for a sign "Slow Children" due to school buses during the school year.

Mr. Koproski stated the trees were removed because they were diseased and damaged from neglect. He stated that there will be trees and grass put on the property. He stated that they will put in a sidewalk as required if the subdivision is granted a fire hydrant will be added which is not presently on the street.

The Chairman inquired whether there were any more comments on this matter. There being none, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing at 7:25 p.m.

PUBLIC HEARING – PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT – VILLAGE DISTRICTS

Ms. Wilson gave a brief overview of the content of the Plan of 1990. This review is for village areas only. Only that portion of the Plan of Development is being amended. It is required by the Connecticut State Statues for the Village Districts to hold two hearings. The setbacks, and heights would not be changed. The process tonight is a second hearing on this plan of development upon which the Commission may act. It would then be referred to the Common Council and then signed off by the Mayor. There are a number of letters from CAM, SWRPA and other agencies. The amendment of the Plan of Development does nothing without the Zoning Commission holding a hearing. The public would be invited to come out and voice their concerns a Zoning Commission hearing.

The Chairman opened the Public Hearing for comment at 7:30 p.m.

Ms. Bain, 78 Wilson Avenue, said that she is a Council representative and life-long resident of the area in Rowayton under consideration for amendment. She stated that one of the attractions is the village and commercial area of the Rowayton properties. The Village District designation allows greater input by the neighbors on how the details and specifics will play out. She questioned how this change will affect the Business 3 Zone. She applauded the process and looks forward to the changes and subsequent approvals.

Mr. Mosha, 17 Ambler Drive, referenced the State Statue that should be reviewed very carefully. He stated that there are more districts in Norwalk than is needed. In the enabling act it refers to expenditures for review by an engineer or architect. He felt that there will be a lot of bureaucracy in the two proposed areas, East and Rowayton Avenues. He wanted the people to look carefully at the cost to the taxpayers, more districts create more cost for expansive growth. He did not think it was the best move to make. He stated that the City is fractured with districts. He stated it was the wrong way to go. He said that he did not understand how the agencies that are supporting this change can be telling Norwalk how they can alter their property beyond the current Zoning laws. He asked that the Commission consider its decision carefully.

Ms. Freidman, 4 Joe’s Barn Way, stated she is on East Avenue more than in Rowayton Avenue where she lives. She said she had a lot of questions about the Village Districts. She said that the special places should be preserved and she hoped that the process would move forward. She read a letter from Mr. Bill Kraus who was unable to attend.

Ms.Lindstrom, 20 Raymond Terrace, commented that the Village District brings a sense of goodness to the City. She expressed that the Commission look beyond the district they are currently considering. She asked that the Commission look at areas that surround the Village District that then could be a layer over two or more districts that should be preserved. She suggested looking at Fitch Street, the Harbor area and below the interstate to include them into the redistricting. She also conducted a survey South of the interstate and received favorable comment and signatures approving a Village District designation.

Mr. Anderson, 46 Rowayton Avenue, stated that he is president of the Rowayton Land Use Association. As a builder and retail owner he welcomes the restrictions in the Rowayton area. He looked forward to working with Mr. Greene on this project.

Ms. Austin, 145 East Avenue, has lived on East Avenue since 1940. She stated she was in favor of protecting what is left of East Avenue. She stated that if the Statute will give "teeth" to preserving East Avenue she was totally in favor. She hoped this would avoid further violations in new buildings on East Avenue.

Ms. Lichtenstein, 5 Vincent Place, commended the Commission for seeking to create a Village District. She asked that the Commission consider reviewing variances that are given as hardships and go outside the zoning regulations. She felt this was a negative impact. She also mentioned the volume of truck traffic for East Avenue and Rowayton Avenue should be noted when this Village District is created.

Mr. Andre said that the confusing item is that there will be more districts. He understood that the district would have to be in place and then the restrictions would be applied. He questioned whether this action would enhance a property or complicate it with added regulations. He inquired about East Avenue being extended as far as Fourth or Fifth Streets. He also understood that the homes had to follow restrictions on color choices and any other changes to maintain this Village District. He felt that more regulations do not enhance the property, but restrict the owner.

Mr. Shatz, Harvestrom Place, inquired what the change actually meant. It was clarified that this was the second meeting required by State Statute on this issue of creating a Village District. Mr. Shatz attended the first hearing and expressed that he now understood what was being discussed was just being expanded upon from the first public hearing.

Ms. Bryant, Morgan Avenue stated that she has been very active in retainning 93 East Avenue. She commended the Commission for its effort to create a Village District. She stated the walking area to businesses and village like areas is what other cities are striving for. She suggested that the Commission think about the proposal as an overlay district. She also asked that the East Avenue Village District go all the way to the river. She recommended that an advisory committee be set up of neighbors of adjacent areas and businessmen as well. This would be a group to oversee the changes in order to avoid wasting time and money. She asked that the guidelines be as clear as possible. She stated the enabling act is very vague. She noted that the historic homes and buildings add more value in a town or city.

There being no more public comment, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:55 p.m.

REPORT OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE

Dennis J. Santella, Chairman

Action on Item III a

** MR. SANTELLA RESOLVED THAT THE PLAN ENTITLED LLC," BY

1. THAT A SURETY, IN AN AMOUNT TO BE DETERMINED BY THE STAFF, BE SUBMITTED TO GUARANTEE THE INSTALLATION OF THE REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS; AND
   
2. THAT ALL REQUIRED SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO ANY SITE WORK; AND
   
3. THAT ANY ADDITIONAL SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS, DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE STAFF, BE INSTALLED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE STAFF; AND
   
4. THAT A CONNECTICUT LICENSED ENGINEER CERTIFY THAT THE REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED TO CITY STANDARDS.
   

** MR. FAVANO SECONDED.

** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

#3510 – Ian Phillips – 33 Wilson Avenue – 4 Lots – Request for extension of approval time – Report & recommendation

Mr. Santella offered the following:

** MR. SANTELLA RESOVED THAT THE TIME FOR FILING THE PLAN

** MR. KYDES SECONDED.

** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

REPORT OF THE LAND USE COMMITTEE

Daniel F. O’Connor, Chairman

Action on Item II – Village District Amendment to Plan of Development

** MR. O’CONNOR MOVED THAT THE ITEM BE REFERRED BACK TO

Mr. Kydes said he wanted to vote on the item tonight.

Mr. Greene inquired whether the Commission wished to review and investigate comments. Mr. Santella stated that if there are restrictions he would like to look at what they might be. Mr. Greene stated that the Zoning Commission could be questioned as to the steps they will take and what might be included in the amendment.

Mr. O’Connor stated that the Commission needed to decide whether they wished to vote on this item or do more research and send it back to committee. Mr. Greene pointed out there is a draft. Mr. Kydes said it is ambiguous.

Mr. O’Connor stated what concerned him was what will be the acceptable style for East Avenue. Mr. Greene replied that the buildings would have to be compatible. Mr. Kydes read the CT State Statue as it is now which leaves it up to the neighborhood or community to make the design decision.

Mr. Greene stated that Zoning’s plan now is not going to change the usage of the zones, it is an overlay zone. He stated that he could not predict what would happen in the future.

Mr. Kydes said the sees a bureaucracy developing.

Mr. O’Connor stated that it seems to be a better proposal for Rowayton than on East Avenue. He said that Rowayton is self-contained and has organizations looking after its character. He further stated that he does not see the same activity on East Avenue when it comes to design. He questioned some of the properties that have been designated historical. He also stated that this idea gives the impression of historical preservation. Mr. Greene said he has informed all parties that this is not a historical preservation amendment.

Mr. Kydes stated his opinion firmly regarding what appears to be restrictions in creating a Village District.

** MR. O’CONNOR WITHDREW HIS MOTION.

** MR. O’CONNOR RESOLVED THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO

1. TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT GOAL TO "IMPROVE THE APPEARANCE OF NORWALK AND THE IMAGE OF THE CITY BY EMPHASIZING QUALITY DESGIN OF ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES." (P. 55)

** MR. SANTELLA SECONDED.

Mr. Kydes commented that he voted against this item because he felt the Commission has done a complete job in Norwalk. He felt that this would create a bureaucratic system that will encumber the rights of those living in the district and it is not fair.

Mr. Favano commented that none of the residents opposed the change. He asked why the Commission should be concerned about the property values if the current population is not.

Mr. Kydes said that a reasonable purchaser in a district that is restricted would want to determine what they want to do with their property. He felt that a Rowayton purchaser will want to have their piece of land to fit into the neighborhood, but not be restricted by an amendment on paint color or other items.

Mr. Kydes stated that red tape would create developing the property within the regulations of a Village District difficult if not undesirable. He stated that it is the owner’s property but he will be controlled by the new amendment.

** THE MOTION FAILED WITH ONE VOTE IN FAVOR (MR. SANTELLA),

A brief discussion continued and the following motion was presented.

** MR. O’CONNOR RESOLVED THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT

1. TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT GOAL TO "IMPROVE THE APPEARANCE OF NORWALK AND THE IMAGE OF THE CITY BY EMPHASIZING QUALITY DESGIN OF ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES." (P. 55)

** MR. FAVANO SECONDED.

** MOTION PASSED WITH FIVE VOTES IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION

** MR. O’CONNOR RESOLVED THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT

1. TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT GOAL TO "IMPROVE THE APPEARANCE OF NORWALK AND THE IMAGE OF THE CITY BY EMPHASIZING QUALITY DESGIN OF ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES." (P. 55)

** MR. SANTELLA SECONDED.

** MOTION FAILED UNANIMOUSLY.

FUTURE MEETINGS

The next meeting will be a special meeting held on July 23, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. in the Community Room of City Hall on Plan Development.

Mr. Santella and Mr. O’Connor gave their thoughts about serving on the Commission over the last few years and stated they enjoyed working with their fellow members. Mr. Favano stated they had performed well and made excellent decisions.

Mr. Thomas thanked them both for their efforts and stated he was sorry to lose two very experienced people. He hoped the new members will be good replacements.

** THE CHAIRMAN MOVED TO ADJOURN.

** MR. KYDES SECONDED.

** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Alvina L. Richardson Decker

Telesco Secretarial Services

Back to Previous Page	Back to Home Page