Soundview Avenue Open Space Purchase

The article in today's Ct. Post shows that it is worthwhile to note the full story and process that can't always be fit into a single article. The Ct.Post article hyperlinks are not retained a that static location forever, so while I include the link, cut/paste the article with my commentary.
http://www.connpost.com/localnews/ci_8443523


By KATE RAMUNNI
SHELTON — The 14 undeveloped acres on Soundview Avenue had been in the city's sights for years. But when the land went on the market last year, officials pounced — and missed.
Instead, the property was sold for $1.4 million to Huntington Development, a group in which Alvaro DaSilva is the principal. He is the longtime chairman of the Inland Wetlands Commission who stepped down from the panel effective last Saturday.

++ The property is 279 Soundview Avenue, uphill from the Meadow Street end. While the parcel is largely undeveloped, it would be better characterized as an oversize lot. There is a single residential structure with the balance of the property being primarily fields used for agriculture and some woodlands. It is within our Shelton Lakes Greenway area on our Open Space Plan. It is adjacent to property both acquired via subdivision regulations from the development of Summerfield Condos on Constitution Boulevard, and via purchase from the Wiacek family for their farm that reaches from this parcel to the SHS campus above the ballfields. ++

DaSilva's group later proposed building a subdivision on the site, a project that won land-use approval less than a year after the sale, and renders the land more valuable.
++ The subdivision of land was an "as-of-right" application for the R1 zone it was within. The PZC, IWC, City Engineer, and CC all reviewed the application that was approved. All of that is in the public domain to be aware of and view via minutes of the agencies. Naturally, after making that subdivision application's investment, the property's value rose with the availability of approved building lots rather than simply land.++

That chain of events, and the city's failure to act sooner, have come under criticism after the Board of Aldermen recently reached a deal to buy the tract for $2.1 million — giving Huntington Development a net profit of $724,000.
++ As mentioned above, there was additional investment of engineering, applications, etc. It is more than looking at land transfer sale amount listed in the paper, and profit= sale price A minus sale price B ++

"I don't know why Mayor [Mark] Lauretti didn't purchase it then when we always have a surplus," said Planning and Zoning Commission alternate Chris Jones. "This deal doesn't smell right." But Lauretti and other city officials said that the seller's insistence that the deal be completed immediately had doomed it from the start.
++ Chris was made aware of what transpired on this parcel, during the course of a PZC meeting where they gave a favorable 8-24 referral toward the acquisition. To characterize the deal as "smelly" post-awareness of that knowledge is unfortunate. ++

A year ago, then-owner Nellie Krynitzky put a "for sale" sign on her property, and Shelton Land Trust President Joe Welsh immediately contacted her, according to Conservation Commission Chairman Tom Harbinson. "She told Joe that she had already had a couple of people contact her," Harbinson said. "I called her that night and she said she was interested in selling, but wanted to sell it immediately." Less than a week after the sign went up, Krynitzky had five offers, Harbinson said. "I knew the city wouldn't have that much money in its pocket to come up with it quickly," he said. And then a short time later, he said, the sale to Huntington Development was finalized.
++ It is not appropriate for me to say what personal reasons Ms. Krynitzky may have had for selling her property, but I had spoken to her directly. She wanted it sold promptly and naturally for the best price. She had at least 5 parties that already had expressed interest within a week of placing the sign on her front lawn. From all the data I have at my disposal, the City reacted as promptly as it could.++

The city should have been able to come up with the money then, Jones said. "It's strange how the city didn't have a million dollars to buy it last year, but now it has $2.1 million," he said. "I don't like how this has flip-flopped."
++ The City is challenged to maneuver as fast as the private parites in the market place. There are approvals or authorizations that have to occur for anyone representing the City to make or negotiate an offer. There are times during the year when the City has ample cash-flow balances (Jun/Dec around tax collection) and other times when it is limited available cash balances ++

The property, located near the Shelton High School/Intermediate School campus, was on the commission's Quality of Life list, Harbinson said, and former commission chairwoman Harriet Wilbur had kept in contact with Krynitzky for years in anticipation that it would eventually be for sale. But there was no indication Krynitzky was going to suddenly sell it last March, Harbinson said. Krynitzky, who couldn't be reached for comment, continued to have others farm the land for corn and apples, he said. "We had no hint that she was going to sell," he said.
++ Pre-2006 Harriet had touched base with Nellie occasionally over the years regarding the City's interest in her parcel. It was farmed for hay and corn. On 2006/Oct/11 Nellie spoke to a person who is a friend of Conservation efforts in Shelton that she was considering selling her property. This was confided to me that evening. Not to long after that Nellie put a sign on her front lawn, which commissioner Joe Welsh saw while driving by and called the number listed. Joe related to me what their conversation covered, and I called her that very evening. I related all of this to the Mayor the following day.++

Once the sign went up, city officials also tried to contact Krynitzky, to no avail, Lauretti said. "She wouldn't return our calls," he said. A registered letter also went unanswered, he said. "We would have paid as much as anyone else," he said.
++ The City has always paid valuations that are transparant with appraisals for the property done by a third party. This is required by law, and is a fiduciary responsibility of the Board of Alderman whcih they have always conducted.++

About two weeks after Huntington Development bought the property, it filed an application with the Planning and Zoning Commission for an 11-lot subdivision, which the commission granted in June. The vote was unanimous, with Commissioner Leon J. Sylvester abstaining.
++ Commissioner's can abstain for any reason. Commissioner Sylvester's wife is a real-estate agent which may have been the reason in this case. It might not be determined as Roberts Rules of Order do not require anyone to state their reason for abstaining. If you have an ethical conflict, you should additionally "recuse" yourself rather than simply abstain, and state the reason for doing so. Someone who recuses themself, steps away from any involvement with the item and doesn't even discuss it or offer their opinion. Abstaining is simply not voting on the motion.++

After that, the city began negotiations to buy the property from DaSilva, who resigned as chairman of the wetlands commission in January before leaving the board entirely at the end of last week. The aldermen approved purchasing the property for $2.2 million, with DaSilva giving back $100,000 of that to the city as an open-space gift. "I think it stinks," said Irving Steiner, founder of the zoning-advocacy group We R-1. "They said they couldn't get the money up and then went into negotiations with DaSilva. What a loss to the taxpayers."
++ The original owner of the property was only interested in a quick sale. This is further evidenced by the fact that a developer bought it in raw form and then applied to develop it - a risk developers usually do not take. Most developers take an "option" to purchase a parcel, which only executes a purchase once a trigger event has occurred, usually sub-division approval. The original owner wanted rid of her property - period. Perhaps she wasn't even interested in an option sale from other developers? It doesn't help to speculate on why Nellie wanted to sell in the way she did. The second owner was willing to consider selling and discussing the structure of a sale to the City, evidenced by the acceptance of the payments being spread over two fiscal years++

"If they're insinuating we paid too much, why didn't they come to us then?" Board of Aldermen President John Anglace said. If the city could have purchased it then, it would have, he said.
The city paid about $150,000 per acre for the land. Active real estate listings show asking prices for an acre of buildable land in the city to range from $200,000 to more than $300,000.
++ The City did appraise and value the property fairly. The ratio per acre or per building lot compares to market values in Shelton. The City is NOT paying more than the property is worth.++

"From our perspective, the question was, is the property worth saving, and we said yes," Harbinson said. "The evaluation [of the land's value] seems to have been done fairly. That's the price we pay for not having the liquidity to buy it in its pre-development, raw status."
"It's a great piece of property," Sylvester said. "I'm just sorry that we are paying so much more for it than we could have, had we acted in a more expeditious manner."
++ I wish we could acquire every parcel in it's pre-development raw-land value status, but this is naturally impossible. However, to improve our ability to do more acquisitions in that manner is beneficial financially to the City. Funding the Open Space Trust Account accurately and consistently will help the City in that effort.++

CC Budget time, Trust Account zero budget

This blog entry is a duplication of a publication posted on Google's "Group Service" used by the Conservation Commission to publish and communicate electronic communications:

Greetings Commissioners,
Last night was the Conservation Commission's turn to defend its budget in front of the Board of Apportionment & Taxation. I believe this was my third year of having to attend this process. As one might imagine, it was a bit of a love fest as everyone is pleased with what the CC does. There was however one SNAFU - and that acronym definately applies.

It isn't within our CC budget's line items, but the Open Space Trust Account (OSTA) is something the Open Space Ordinance calls for us to report on, and is obviously important for us to monitor activity within. Similar to us catching developers not paying their required fee-in-lieu of payments into the account which resulted from subdivision applications, I have caught that the Mayor's proposed budget shows a zero allocation to the OSTA instead of the amount required by ordinance: $250,000.

I was neither given the courtesy of a heads-up for this by the Mayor despite having a chance encounter twice in the past 2 weeks at the local diner - one when Vice Chair Bill Dyer was dining with me, or at two planned meetings that occured during the past month for unrelated staff sessions in his office. The Mayor also did not attach an explanation for such a substantial change to his Proposed Budget as he is required to do by Charter (see p.28 of hyperlink for Sec.7.2 item a) "...and indicating any major changes from the current fiscal year, together with the reasons for such changes,..."). I found out about this when several different people started asking me about it (an Aldermen, and persons on BoA&T). This issue occurred pretty quickly and subsequent to our last CC mtg, so I had to act simply as Chairman administering this.

When I was finished answering the BoA&T's two or three questions for our standard budget items, I turned the tables in asking about why this OSTA budget item was zero instead of the required $250k. I assume nobody, other than those who contacted me as mentioned above, knew what I was talking about because nobody spoke up with an answer. I gave the budget line item number for the OSTA and pointed out this was a violation of existing ordinance. Everyone seemed unaware of the ordinance, as nobody said anything and were looking rather dumb-founded, thumbing thru pages of printouts to find the item I was talking about. Alderman Finn, Olin, Papa and Simonetti were present at this meeting (Anglace arrived after I was finished speaking) and nobody had an answer as to why the change.

I explained that there were known expenditures from contracts/agreements that would occur in fiscal year 08/09 toward Open Space purchases (Soundview Ave payment #2 and #3 motion by the BOA from 2008Feb14) and Development Rights (PDR of JFF Homestead Acres bonding payment) that could rightly and correctly come from the OSTA. Surely those 2 known expenditure items were budgeted somewhere else in the Mayor's proposal. Nobody had that answer either.

I suggested that the Ordinance be followed with money budgeted, appropriated within 45days of the fiscal year, and then expended from the OSTA toward either of the two items mentioned above which everyone knows will exceed $250k. This would not increase spending in anyway, merely adjust between budget line items as sourcing for which known expenditures are required to occur in the coming FY. It finally seemed to sink in, (especially when they realized I wasn't actually asking for any more money to be EXPENDED) and the BoA&T chairman asked me to send him the documentation.

During a bathroom break from the meeting, I spoke with 2 Aldermen who understood my explanation and saw no problem with taking that direction. I attempted to reach the Mayor in advance of this meeting with no success. I did reach him after the meeting via phone during which we had a "vigorous" 6 minute discussion of the subject. The merits of my explanation were not accepted and his rebuttal devolved into recounting his past expenditures and what he has done for open space previously. Before he terminated our conversation (rather abruptly), he indicated that we will now see a future item on the BOA agenda to modify the OSTA Ordinance.

I'm pretty upset about this. I wish I didn't have to publish "dirty laundry" in are usual public forum, but when the Ordinance says to do something, and the Charter says to do something, and the Mayor blatantly violates both - I unfortunately have to bring it to everyone's attention on the BoA&T for correction just as we did for the missing fee-in-lieu of payments with P&Z. As you can imagine, there was a reporter in the audience, and I expect this storyline will spin into a politicized mess. Given other questions I've been getting and having to respond to regarding the recent Soundview Ave purchase (I was asked to speak during the P&Z mtg this week when they gave the 8-24 referral - unanimously), my greater concern is in regard to the effect on the public's perception about Open Space preservation efforts, and possible setbacks towards future acquisitions we have been working toward and are all aware about on CC which I obviously won't reveal here.

My experience has been that a reporter's notes, and presentation of the facts is challenged to fully explain the subject when confined to a paper's collumns and word count (I did answer some reporter questions asked of me outside the auditorium). Trying to clarify the full story is one reason why I'm using a public venue besides what was obviously a public meeting already. I don't have the time to say the same responses to 3 different reporters asking questions for the same story. I instead offer this data source which they can refer to.

I worked for months, spending a tremendous amount of personal time with Alderman Anglace to prepare the OSTA Ordinance and remove ambiguity of what could be expected for the future. You will recall in the process that the motion was given a "non-approval" (veto) letter by the Mayor, and after modification was passed again (hyperlink has BOA segment of their meeting on 2006Sep14). The ordinance was followed in FY 06/07 ($50k, though appropriated late) and 07/08 ($250k). I did have to bird-dog the finance department for the proper timely allocation both years as nobody had told them what the ordinance was requiring.

I take great issue with the amount of time and work I put into such activities, and then seeing it negated by officials with deliberate ignorance under the guise that they meet the "intent". It is disheartening and causes me to question if I am best serving this avocation in my current position.

Note: By nature of a special email address, this message is simultaneously appearing in my Chairman's Media Blog in addition to being published in our Google Group.

Thomas Harbinson

Shelton Canal filling - letter to editor rebuttal

A recent letter to the editor endorsed filling in the Shelton Canal out of safety concerns. With a recent car in a segment of the canal (unrelated to the proposed fill-in area), it is easy to understand such a conclusion, but I would submit it is an incorrect one.

The City of Shelton owes it's current economic power in part to it's location on the Housatonic River and the business leaders of years ago who built the Ousatonic Dam and a canal to use the subsequent water power for running factory machines. There is still one company remaining that uses water from the canal for their manufacturing operation. In 1986, the owner of this infrastructure (McCallum Enterprises) received a license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to take water generated electricity from the river. That process of building a new hydro plant blocked off the canal from any navigable use and made the locks non-purposeful (though they still are there). The license also required that the company prepare a fish ladder to allow migration up river beyond the impediment of the dam. This was never completed, apparently due to the financial cost.

With exciting changes coming to the character of Canal Street due to the residential developments being proposed, McCallum, seeing new possibilities, has investigated their options and begun pursuit of approvals to fill-in the canal from the locks up to the hydro plant (apx. 2.5 acres) for the purposes of real-estate development under the premise of using gains from the activity toward funding a fish ladder construction. There have been no serious safety issues with this area of the canal. The DEP has a recreational lease upon the area that allows public access for fishing and other passive enjoyment of the broad vistas up the Housatonic River. The area was hoped to be a feature destination when the downtown Riverwalk undergoes expansion.

There are many nuances to this process with applications to FERC, Army Corps of Engineers, and the Ct DEP. Also, as a waterbody, the City's own Inland Wetlands Agency has some jurisdictional aspects to address. The Shelton Conservation Commission is very concerned with this concept. We are non-regulatory, but in our role as the environmental conscience of the community we have attempted to bring public awareness by creating a webpage of photos, satelite images, links to various agencies with application documents and instruction for the manner in which the public can make constructive and impacting comments on them (some of which have deadlines). Simply google search "Shelton Canal" and you should see it in the top results. The Housatonic River, and the canal with it's locks are a regional resource, so I would encourage more than just a Shelton resident to offer their comments.

The area represents a heritage that is valued highly by the community and was recently featured in a watercolor cover for the City of Shelton's 2007 Annual Report. The early constructors of the Dam thought well enough of the public good to give some property to the City creating Riverview Park (the City's first park) which overlooks this canal area. Perhaps it is time again for the current owners to think of the greater public good.

Thomas Harbinson
Shelton Conservation Commission - Chairman
This email is being simultaneously sent to the CtPost editor, and this media blog

Editor: This may be too long for you to include, but it is important as the address to the page the conservation commission has created to promote public awareness:
http://sheltonopenspace.googlepages.com/sheltoncanal

Bobcat in region photographed

The numerous sightings of a bobcat have failed to have a photographic evidence to confirm the claim - until now.

Spotted on Poverty Hollow Road in Eason/Redding area is a bobcat. While it can't be claimed to be the same one from Shelton, it does show that they can be in our area.

Airsoft bio-degradable BB's

Similar to the paintball activity, there is a new game that many kids have hooked onto called "airsoft". You shoot these tiny pellets, or BBs as we call them. Conservation Agent Teresa G. has encountered some areas on Shelton Open Space where the typical teenager hang-out debris occurs, along with this airsoft residue.


In WalMart they sell the equipment, and both the plastic BBs along with bio-degradable BBs. It is reasonable to assume that users are not going around to pick up their shot BBs. Even when on private property it has an effect on ecology with wildlife, so this is not just an "on open space" issue. Rather than have more plastic in the environment / ecosystem, perhaps the State could consider mandating that the biodegradable version be used since it is already available. For example.

plastic airsoft BBs:
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=6527843


biodegradable airsoft BBs:
http://www.amazon.com/Cybergun-5000ct-Biodegradable-Airsoft-BBs/dp/B000OYH9EM/ref=sr_1_7/102-1849596-7216116?ie=UTF8&s=sporting-goods&qid=1193875968&sr=1-7

On 10/31/07, Kate Ramunni wrote:

Hi Tom,

I saw on the message board something about you
requesting Larry Miller introduce legislation about
BBs -- was wondering what that's about. Thanks!

kate

CRRA Xfer liability and Closure Plan

Response to question from CtPost reporter Kate Rumani on 2007/Oct25


As a resident of the area, I would hope that there are safeguards in place to ensure that whoever assumes management will maintain the gas recovery operation properly. Once in the past when the CRRA delegated duties, a contractor (forget the name) was charged with running the methane extraction operation and it turned out they hadn't replaced filters anywhere near the periodic schedule and the system then clogged, leading to methane migration and the most recent methane event a few years ago. At that time, the head of the CRRA attended an informational meeting at Long Hill School (along with other CRRA staff and some City leadership) to lay out the corrective plans to prevent that happening again (which included replacing the contractor), and at a subsequent informational meeting (I was at both) a "Closure Plan" was presented which has yet to be followed thru on.

While the landfill does have areas of contamination that were shown to be sequestered far from any proposed public use, the site is a substantial area with existing access roads that reach the waterfront and an inlet near the confluence of the Far Mill River. The Closure Plan presented involved improvements to the entrance at Rte110 with stone walls replacing the existing chainlink fence, parking areas for users and a location for canoes to put into the lagoon area that opens to the Housatonic River, and decorative plantings. Hiking trails were shown on maps that would allow passive recreation to observe the significant wildlife on the site as it continues reverting to a more natural setting. I have personally observed deer, coyote's and numerous birdlife from the adjacent Sports Center.

The Housatonic River is a mighty natural resource for the region. If the former landfill site can be put to use in providing passive enjoyment of that resource, I believe that would be beneficial and should be pursued. Since that has been presented for several years as the plan by the CRRA, it should be completed in a timely manner or explained to the community as to why a different direction or delay has taken place. I believe the Closure Plan as previously illustrated was a good thing for the community, and any permitting or safety issues that may be holding back it's implementation should be addressed.

The development projects proposed in recent years along both sides of the Housatonic (marina, sports ctr, residential development, golf course), have to various degrees taken away potential areas for public enjoyment of the river. If this site will have no future opportunity to balance that aspect, it would alter my personal viewpoint when analyzing future Shelton development proposals in that river corridor.

Ideas on how to enjoy Open Space this Fall

This was emailed to editorial dept of CtPost, HuntHrld and ShltnWkly on WedOct3.

People will soon come to our region to witness the landscape's foliage color change of fall. In Shelton, some will experience those vistas while picking pumpkins and apples, enjoying haunted hayrides and corn mazes, or buying cider, wines and ice-cream on our local farms. A large part of this activity is made possible by the value our residents have endorsed being invested into open space, particularly in those lands preserved for agricultural use, but perhaps less known are the many of opportunities for the public to enjoy the variety of open space lands conserved for passive recreation in Shelton.

On SatOct6 at Indian Well State Park, the New Haven Rowing Club is hosting the 13th annual "Head of the Housatonic" regatta that has 600 entries with athletes from various Northeast schools competing all morning on the Housatonic River. The City of Shelton has purchased much of the property along the ridge lines near the park to preserve the vista of the river's corridor. You can get a birds-eye view of the staging area from Riverview Park, Shelton's first preserved park space. If you want to experience the river for yourself (downstream), you can launch a cayak from Southbank Park and enjoy a picnic at it's pavilion.

On SunOct7 at downtown Shelton, the Shelton/Derby Rotary is conducting "Shelton Day" with all their exciting activities. It puts on display the value of our downtown with the riverwalk and park areas on the river to enjoy, and which will be expanded upon with the on-going plans for downtown re-development. Check out the Shelton Land Conservation Trust's booth to see how they operate independently from the City government toward preserving lands in Shelton.

On TueOct9 at the Shelton Lakes Greenway area, the Shelton High Cross Country Team hosts their last home meet of the year against Amity and Cheshire on the RecPath and Turkey Trot Trails. How inspiring to see the school's education campus utilize the forested areas surrounding it for such passive recreation use, just as we envisioned when it was purchased. There are roughly 400 acres with 10 miles of trails in this area for anyone in the public to hike during the day.

Looking for something to do with the kids off school? Spice up a hike with a bit of adventure. On Open Space in Shelton there are hidden 23 letterboxes and 36 geocaches to find. The sheltontrails.org website also has nature guides for items to be aware of and keep kids learning about their surroundings (and despite recent news reports, there are NO mountain lions to worry about).

The City is grateful for the work of volunteers and groups to make these opportunities possible. The SHS Cross Country team helped do maintenance on the Turkey Trot Trail with the hard working Trails Committee of the Shelton Conservation Commission, the Girl Scouts Troop 363 is cleaning the Huntington Wellfield while Troop 512 cleaned up around the Far Mill River in Pine Rock Park. Last weekend and this, there are volunteers taking macroinvertabrae samples on the Far Mill River to help the DEP study its water quality.

Enjoy the fall weather and land preserved in the community, by the community, and for the community.