The Simsbury
Board of Selectmen received an update on the status of the town's newly
revised plan of conservation and development that was given by Director of
Community Planning William Voelker.
Voelker explained that the plan, which was last updated in 1994, is
still being worked on by several town departments and is expected to be
finalized in December when a public hearing will be held on the changes
that have been made to it. The reformed plan will outline the path that the
town takes in areas such as economic development, housing and other
community related issues, which Voelker said will help lead Simsbury into a
bright future.
"The Planning Commission and all of the other boards and committees
that have worked on updating this plan have done a great job and we have
made substantial progress," Voelker said. "We will continue
working over the next few weeks to finalize our work leading up to the
public hearing in December and we hope to hear any concerns that citizens
may have between now and then."
One citizen who wanted to make his opinions on Simsbury's economic development heard was
Bill Miller, a member of a grassroots organization called Simsbury
Homeowners Advocating Responsible Expansion, or S.H.A.R.E., who said that
he and his organization would be opposed to having any large retail
development move into Simsbury
under the guidelines of the new plan.
"We are very opposed to having a big box type development move into our
community as it would be in accordance with the new plan of conservation
and development and this would only be detrimental to our town,"
Miller said. "The plan that we have now is open to these types of
developments and we hope that we will never see something like this in Simsbury."
"I don't believe that any of us feel that it is a good thing for this
town to start down the path of having a big box development and we must
come up with more constructive ways to utilize available property we
have," Selectman John Hampton said. "We must do everything in our
power to maintain the character of the Farmington
valley."
In other development and conservation news the Board of Selectmen explained
that they have continued their talks with the Trust for Public Land
organization in an attempt to save the 450-acre property owned by the Ethel Walker School
on Bushy Hill Road
from being developed. Residents from a neighborhood group opposed to the
development of the Ethel
Walker School
property announced that they have recently withdrawn a legal appeal they
made in the hopes of stopping any development in light of the ongoing talks
between the school, the town and the Trust for Public Land.
"The citizen's group "Keep the Woods" has announced that it
will withdraw its appeal of the wetlands map amendment of the Ethel Walker School
land in light of ongoing discussions among the Town of Simsbury, the Trust for Public Land,
and the Ethel
Walker School.
Janet Beatty, of Keep the Woods said in a press release. "All parties
involved have indicated that they are interested in preserving the land and
Keep the Woods believes that the Town and Ethel Walker
School are moving
forward in good faith in these efforts. In the spirit of cooperation, and
as a good faith gesture of its own, Keep the Woods will relinquish its
appeal rights and devote all of its resources to supporting the town, First
Selectman Tom Vincent, the Ethel Walker School, and the Trust for Public
Land."
While the neighborhood group believed that supporting the partnership
between the town and the Trust for Public Land
was the right thing to do, Selectman William Garrity said that he felt
passing on the development opportunity that the Ethel Walker property
represents would be a mistake for Simsbury.
"I don't believe that the town should be involved with the TPL on this issue because in order for the town
to work through this partnership we will have to give up on other capital
projects that have been waiting in line for a long time," Garrity
said. "The Ethel Walker property could be a big moneymaker for Simsbury and I don't
think that a new housing development would be a detriment to our town
services or to the quality of life we have. I feel that it would be a
better project for the town if this property gets built out."
|
