Date: Fri 13-Sep-1996

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

Whispering-Pines-P&Z

Full Text:

P&Z Approves `Whispering Pines' With Stipulations

B Y A NDREW G OROSKO

The Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) last week approved the controversial

Whispering Pines residential subdivision, but has cut the number of building

lots proposed by the developers and placed many controls on how construction

will proceed.

Developers Thomas Maguire and Larry Edwards of PSD Partnership had been

seeking 16 lots on the 26-acre parcel in Sandy Hook near Pine Street, Cherry

Street and Narragansett Trail. But on September 5, P&Z members decided that

only 13 building lots should be developed.

In April, PSD had sought 19 lots for the property, but the P&Z rejected that

plan, citing concerns over drainage, sedimentation, erosion, excavation and

grading.

Attorney Robert Hall, who represents PSD, had no immediate comment on the

P&Z's decision to allow only 13 lots, and on Tuesday this week Mr Maguire said

no decision had been made on whether the decision would be challenged in

court.

Residents in the vicinity of the development have complained loudly that

building houses there would result in an overcrowded neighborhood, more

traffic safety hazards, and depleted water supplies in existing wells, among

other concerns.

In response, the developers have said the 16-lot subdivision plan addressed

all the concerns that had been raised by P&Z members when they rejected the

19-lot proposal.

On September 5, P&Z Chairman Stephen Adams proposed numerous stipulations on

the development project. P&Z members endorsed the stipulations in a 4-to-1

vote. Member John DeFilippe, though, maintained the P&Z should reject the

development proposal outright.

Among the stipulations listed by Mr Adams:

PSD must eliminate Lots 10, 11, and 12 as building lots and relocate its

accessway to open space land on the parcel.

PSD must not resubdivide any of the 13 lots.

The applicants must submit a revised estimate of the amount of earth material

to be removed from the land in light of fewer building lots on the property.

The developers must hire a person to monitor and report on the amount of earth

materials removed from the property.

PSD must submit a landscaping plan for the property for P&Z review indicating

what visual buffering will be provided for five lots which abut nearby

Buttonball Drive properties.

The developers must submit a plan showing what large trees will be cut and how

those trees will be replaced. Each large tree removed must be replaced by a

new tree.

PSD must submit a plan explaining what steps it will take to ensure public

safety on the property during new road construction.

The road bonding for the project shall be increased.

"The commission is not usually in the position of significantly reshaping a

subdivision application. However, pursuant to our subdivision regulations, we

can approve, modify or disapprove an application... This property does have

the potential for some development, although not what was proposed by the

applicant," according to Mr Adams.

"The land involved can be considered marginal at best. Its most prominent

features include severe slopes surrounding a sensitive and locally significant

wetland. The impact of the development as proposed would overwhelm this

location. Instead of working with a difficult piece of land, this proposal

seeks to overwork the land," according to Mr Adams.

"With these modifications, I believe that we will have a subdivision plan that

comes closer to meeting the requirements of our regulations and the spirit of

our plan of development than was submitted to us by the applicant, especially

given the limitations of this particular piece of property," he said.

"I believe that we are moving toward working with the land, and in this case,

listening to the whispering pines," he said.

Mr Adams said the P&Z has not received any expert testimony on the Whispering

Pines proposal to prove that added development in the area will deplete

existing water wells there.

Mr DeFilippe, however, took issue with Mr Adams' various stipulations on the

development approval.

P&Z members aren't in a technical position to say which building lots should

be deleted from a proposal, Mr DeFilippe said. The biggest problem with the

16-lot proposal is the removal of 38,000 cubic yards of earth materials from

the site as part of subdivision construction, he said. Mr DeFilippe said he is

"uncomfortable" with the developer's application and also with Mr Adams'

changes to it.

Mr DeFilippe urged P&Z members to reject the application, noting that whatever

action the P&Z takes in the matter, it likely will be challenged in court.

On September 6, Jack McGarvey, head of the Rocky Glen Area Association, said

the 26-acre parcel planned for development is suitable for only six or seven

building lots. Association members will discuss the P&Z's action to determine

what to do next, he said.

"We're just trying to figure it all out," he said.

The P&Z should have rejected the 16-lot development plan and asked PSD for a

third version of it, he said.