Just The Facts

To the Editor:

Summer of 2007, Vona Mason and Contractors’ representatives invited residents within a 500-foot radius of Phase III subdivision to view development plans and give comments. Residents voiced concern on the condition and excess traffic on Eden Hill. Some Split Rock residents were dissatisfied about their road’s extension to the development. At that point, Split Rock had a 50-foot access deeded to the town for extension. The Vona representatives said they preferred not doing the extension.

 In 2008, residents received certified letters about Vona Mason’s application to Inland Wetland Commission. Plans called for extending Split Rock. There was one public hearing. One individual asked about alternative plans without a Split Rock extension. In August, Inland Wetlands approved the application and Split Rock extension.

Impacted residents received a letter announcing the Planning and Zoning meeting in December, which was deferred until January because of the holiday without further mailing announcements. Residents who expected the road extension were upset when reading The Newtown Bee following the first Planning and Zoning meeting. Inadvertently, they didn’t know the meeting was rescheduled. Further, parties interested in eliminating the extension came and voiced concerns. Planning and Zoning members took a straw vote in favor of not extending the road, but open meetings would record all opinions on the extension.

Gino Vona said he was willing to extend the road or not depending on the decision of Planning and Zoning, which said it needed a town attorney’s ruling on its leeway to decide on the extension. The attorney advised P&Z to require the applicant to do the surveying and engineering for the extension but to use its own discretion on whether it should be built.

 At the final meeting, Planning and Zoning identified the extension’s pros and cons:

Pros: Recommended by the town’s engineer, fire marshal, police commissioner and public works department. Additionally, the attorney who assisted in developing the Planning and Zoning rules and regulations said the second developer (Vona Mason and Contractor) was responsible for extending the road to the deeded property from the first development (Split Rock Road).

Cons: The following list along with developer’s estimated costs: length of road, 880 feet; cut and fill; disturbance; clearing 1.5 acres; 9 catch basins; 556 feet of piping; and upkeep costs. In addition, Split Rock’s concern about crime and home devaluation.

Neutral: Unchanged fire response, only minor traffic impact (per Vona’s traffic study) and neighbors presenting pro/con arguments for the extension.

 Several points by those not wanting the extension were not addressed. The commission’s final decision was not open to discussion. Four Planning and Zoning commissioners voted unanimously to require the application to show a 50-foot access way labeled as a separate parcel, and to convey that parcel to the town for a potential town road.

Now, it’s the town and not the developer’s responsibility for the additional 50-foot access and development for any “future potential road” connecting the two subdivisions. Discussions are taking place regarding the utilization of the town-owned property by residents until if/when there is a road.

Sharon Cohen

8 Eden Hill Road, Newtown                                              April 1, 2009