Three months ago, Stan Williams and I posted an "Open Letter" to the Selectboard and Planning Commission asking a series of questions we hoped would spur public discussion of the sewer extension implications of the King Arthur expansion project.
While we expressed our support for the sewer extension, we posed the questions in an effort to help everyone appreciate the difficult planning and permitting issues posed by sewer service regardless of King Arthur's specific plans.
Our Open Letter "respectfully request[ed] the Planning Commission and/or Selectboard to provide written public responses so all townspeople can participate in this discussion."
As yet there has been no public response of any kind to the questions posed in our Open Letter from either the Selectboard or Planning Commission.
I can imagine several possible explanations for the resounding silence in the interim:
They were all stupid questions?
No one has time to determine whether there might be some decent questions among the stupid ones?
There's been no time in busy SB or PC agendas to respond in any way?
It's unreasonable for individual citizens to expect volunteer boards to take the time to respond to every Open Letter they receive?
Public discussion of the planning issues might have delayed King Arthur's plans?
King Arthur may not need a sewer extension after all?
If we really wanted answers, we would have attended Selectboard and Planning Commission meeting to demand them?
No one else seemed to care about these questions, so why not ignore them?
No SB or PC members read the listserv?
This morning, Phil Dechert posted public notice on the DRB mailing list announcing the first public hearing on King Arthur's Conditional Use permit application. This public hearing is scheduled for 7:30pm the day after tomorrow, Thursday, September 16th.
So I have another question:
How should we have addressed these questions to prompt public discussion of what many have said over the years should be a planning priority for this town?
And some more:
This is how land use planning and permitting work in Norwich today.
Is this how planning and permitting should work in Norwich?
Do land use planning and permitting work in Norwich?
The questions are piling up.
3 comments:
Here's a reply I received from Phil Dechert (also posted on listserv):
On Sep 15, 2010, at 7:09 PM, Phil Dechert wrote:
Watt,
In response to issues raised on your post to the Norwich List, the following two items were in the Selectboard minutes and packets on the website.
[TWO EXCERPTS FROM RECENT SB/PC MINUTES/CORRESPONDENCE REDACTED HERE DUE TO SPACE LIMITATIONS - -SEE ENXT COMMENT WHERE THEY ARE REPRODUCED SEPARATELY]
One of the PC members has been keeping contact with the Selectboard on this issue and I understand there has been at least one meeting between the town managers and Selectboard chairs of both towns.
KAF has structured their proposed Norwich expansion to work with onsite wastewater in order to have permits in hand by December 31, 2010 to qualify for their funding. They have stated that they will continue to work with Dresden and Hartford on a future connection to the Hartford sewer system.
The PC will be addressing areas of higher density development areas as soon as the town plan is adopted. Those areas may require off-site wastewater capacity in order to build-out in which case sewer connections will need to be addressed. This planning process will be based on significant public participation.
Also, the Planning Commission cannot respond to “open Letters” posted on a listserv or sent to a newspaper until discussed at a warned meeting. I would recommend sending your letter directly to the Planning Commission so that it may be considered at a warned meeting. You may also want to distribute copies to the world. This email is not a response from the Planning Commission since they will not be meeting until next week.
I hope this brings you up to date with these issues.
Phil
First Redacted Item:
NORWICH PLANNING COMMISSION
June 7, 2010
TO: Norwich Selectboard
FROM: Norwich Planning Commission
RE: King Arthur Flour Sewer Line
In regard to the proposed extension of a municipal sewer line from Hartford to the Norwich facility of King Arthur Flour, we wish to express our concerted opinion that to optimally address land use planning concerns, and in accordance with both the current and proposed town plans, it would be preferable to utilize a route along US Route 5 rather than across the Dresden School District land. Please understand, however, that we also wish to express our strong support for the continued and expanded presence of King Arthur Flour, as it is an ideal commercial citizen and neighbor, whose role in our community is entirely consistent with those same town plans.
Approved at the May 27, 2010 by a unanimous vote
(Several members of the PC appeared at the SB Meeting June 23)
SB Minutes June 23
12. Correspondence (b) Resident –
1) #12 a). Memo from Norwich Planning Commission Re: King Arthur Flour Sewer
Line.
Childs moved (2nd Bagnato) to receive a memo from the Norwich Planning
Commission re: King Arthur Flour sewer line. Motion passed. Blake read the
memo. Five of seven members of the Planning Commission were present in
support of the continued and expanded presence of King Arthur Flour. The
Planning Commission would like the Board to enter into a dialog with the Town of
Hartford regarding sewer future intentions, capacities and infrastructure. They
recommend that a subcommittee be set up consisting of two Planning Commission
members, two Selectboard members and the Town Manager. If a subcommittee
is formed, Racusin would like to be a part of it. After further discussion, Childs
moved (2nd Bagnato) that the Selectboard authorize the Town Manager and
Selectboard Chair to establish a meeting with the Town of Hartford to discuss
these matters. Motion passed 4 to 1 (yes – Childs, Bagnato, Blake and Lupien; no
– Racusin).
Post a Comment