Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Huh? It already has. Ridgefield has a large strip mall with a Kohls, Stop and Shop and other chains. Wilton also has a large strip mall with an Outback, TJ Maxx and other chains.
These types of developments are inevitable in growing communities.
Sorry, i thought my dripping sarcasm was clear. I guess it wasn't.
The supermarket is actually supposed to be a Price Chopper Market Bistro - A higher end version on their stores that they feel competes for the Whole Foods demographic.
How many Market Bistro by Price Chopper stores are there, anyway?
As for the Walmart in Monroe, it was well advertised that a large store was proposed. It should not matter if it is a Walmart, Kmart or Target, just that it was a large store. Again, where were people when the project was proposed? A few came out but not a lot until it was confirmed that it was a Walmart. There was speculation in the newspaper that it was them. There were even posts here on this website about it. Like I said, no sympathy here. JMHO, Jay
Jay, it wasn't formally proclaimed to be a Walmart until a few weeks ago. And the public hearing was not well advertised at all. There were rumors circulating by mouth, then suddenly a blip on the Patch regarding a "maybe" Walmart public hearing, with little advance warning. It might even have been the day of. There was nothing in the Monroe Courier in advance of the hearing, only after the fact. A lot of people don't read the Patch, they rely on the Courier for local news, which is a weekly paper. To top it off, public officials wouldn't let the public speak at the hearings anyway. I believe the first one they allowed a few minutes of comments then postponed the hearing to another date but wouldn't let the public speak, and by that time there was a large crowd. Here's a snippet of the later meeting. Just before the hearing ended, Ronald Bunovsky of Monroe called out from his seat, "Point of order! I was under the impression last meeting that you said the public could speak."
"Mr Bunovsky, no!" O'Hara replied. "The agreement was the public would be allowed to speak if there were substantive changes. There was no substantive change. The hearing will close."
"If somebody wasn’t here on the 21st when the hearing was open, then it’s on them …” O’Hara said. “I understand your concern but we have a procedure I’m going to stick to it.
Editing to say I think a lot of developers do this, keep the public hearings hush-hush so they can push through their development's approval. I think they need the cooperation of the local Town Selectman/Mayor to do this though, which is a shame. Residents should have a say or even a vote on what is developed in their town.
Last edited by andthentherewere3; 07-18-2014 at 06:50 AM..
Jay, it wasn't formally proclaimed to be a Walmart until a few weeks ago. And the public hearing was not well advertised at all. There were rumors circulating by mouth, then suddenly a blip on the Patch regarding a "maybe" Walmart public hearing, with little advance warning. It might even have been the day of. There was nothing in the Monroe Courier in advance of the hearing, only after the fact. A lot of people don't read the Patch, they rely on the Courier for local news, which is a weekly paper. To top it off, public officials wouldn't let the public speak at the hearings anyway. I believe the first one they allowed a few minutes of comments then postponed the hearing to another date but wouldn't let the public speak, and by that time there was a large crowd. Here's a snippet of the later meeting. Just before the hearing ended, Ronald Bunovsky of Monroe called out from his seat, "Point of order! I was under the impression last meeting that you said the public could speak."
"Mr Bunovsky, no!" O'Hara replied. "The agreement was the public would be allowed to speak if there were substantive changes. There was no substantive change. The hearing will close."
"If somebody wasn’t here on the 21st when the hearing was open, then it’s on them …” O’Hara said. “I understand your concern but we have a procedure I’m going to stick to it.
Editing to say I think a lot of developers do this, keep the public hearings hush-hush so they can push through their development's approval. I think they need the cooperation of the local Town Selectman/Mayor to do this though, which is a shame. Residents should have a say or even a vote on what is developed in their town.
By law, all public hearings MUST be advertised and I am sure there was a legal notice for this one. Also the law requires all property owners within 500 feet of the project site to be notified of the application. It is not the fault of the town or the developer that the Monroe Courier did not cover this story. That is the paper's fault quite frankly.
As for the hearing, there are rules that must be followed but allowing public comment on an application after the public comment session has been closed is strictly up to the discreation of the zoning board. As I understand it, the proposal was not controversal until it was found to be a Walmart. The zoning board cannot judge an application by who the tenant of the building is. They can only look at the project proposed and what the use is. I think there would have been a lot less opposition if this was a Target but again that cannot be part of the board's decision. However, with such a controversal project it might have been in the best interest of the community to allow more people to speak at the second hearing. Jay
By law, all public hearings MUST be advertised and I am sure there was a legal notice for this one. Also the law requires all property owners within 500 feet of the project site to be notified of the application. It is not the fault of the town or the developer that the Monroe Courier did not cover this story. That is the paper's fault quite frankly.
As for the hearing, there are rules that must be followed but allowing public comment on an application after the public comment session has been closed is strictly up to the discreation of the zoning board. As I understand it, the proposal was not controversal until it was found to be a Walmart. The zoning board cannot judge an application by who the tenant of the building is. They can only look at the project proposed and what the use is. I think there would have been a lot less opposition if this was a Target but again that cannot be part of the board's decision. However, with such a controversal project it might have been in the best interest of the community to allow more people to speak at the second hearing. Jay
I know it's lame, but I often go to the town's meeting agenda lists, and meeting minutes online. No surprises if you proactively spend a few minutes looking.
I know it's lame, but I often go to the town's meeting agenda lists, and meeting minutes online. No surprises if you proactively spend a few minutes looking.
You have to understand something. At some point, Oxford will need basic shopping. Yes its a town of 13,000 people but it is growing and you can't rely on other towns to provide amenities. As long as these commercial areas don't begin to crawl into residential areas, it's fine. And that's not happening- route 67 is a main road in town. Plus because it is in the center of town, I don't think people will be coming from Seymour, Southbury, Monroe to shop there, so traffic isn't an issue.
I looked at the plans and it looks to be village style with botiques and the like, built to look colonial. Why is this a bad thing? The "chain restaurant" will probably be a Chipotle or Panera Bread, not an Applebees. Also I read that these townhouses and flats will start at from the mid 200s to over 300k - that's not "affordable" at all, especially seeing that they will be 1 and 2 br units. In fact, that's ridiculously expensive IMO.
Plus the tax revenue will be almost $1m a year!
You have a great plan on your hands yet towns people are screaming no.
I could not disagree more...
This is a bad bad plan and you will never, I say NEVER see the $900,000.00 which by the is an estimation over several years.
Rte 67 is not made nor will it handle the influx of traffic, even the first selectman freely admits that, yet there is no plan to address it. There is not plan, because the only plan would be to widen the road and that will take years and millions of dollars.... Yes MILLIONS... that alone would wipe out any so called revenue, but wait its not just about money... the construction to widen that road would create traffic and inconvenience on 67 for years... and disrupt the quiet and peace of Oxford. All this at the Tax payers cost which most definitely will need to be raised in an effort to enhance a landlords property.
Now lets talk about this retail space... there is no known retail space to date that does not experience "Loss Prevention" Therefore, these retail stores will also experience some sort of "Loss Prevention" which really means crime.... So you will see an increase in Crime in Oxford.. that's a fact. Now when crime rates go up in any municipality, do you know what goes down?? Home values!! Do oxford residents really want their home values to go down??? Now if home values go down, yet the town needs a certain amount of revenue to exist then that's when Mil rates go up.. and that is a sure way to get your taxes increased once again.
So now you have this BIG development with store and banks and flats all tucked out of the way, you have road crews widening 67 and an increase in crime.. SO now you need a plan to deal with it... and as you say Oxford is "GROWING" (as if that's a good thing) well do you know what else needs to grow now??? The towns First responders... Oxford will need more Police, fire and possibly and EMS or ambulance service... So lets say you need more Police, because crime is up... Well you are going to hire more Police Officers. According to the [URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad =rja&uact=8&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bjs .gov%2Findex.cfm%3Fty%3Dtp%26tid%3D71&ei=IVnaU8jhJ sibyASinoCADw&usg=AFQjCNHETMw1MbDggOFY0rN7ZEiIppDf Sg&bvm=bv.72185853,d.aWw"]Bureau of Justice Statistics [/URL]adding just once officer has a fiscal cost to the town of $116,000.00. and you are going to need more than one... You are going to need a few and then you are going to need a Police Dept. Do you know the cost of building a Police dept?? I don't now the cost, But I can tell you this. Recently a town local to Oxford replaced their 911 system and that cost a little over a million dollars..... MILLION,, not counting the actual building and computers and furnishing to that building all the other costs of a new construction facility... not to mention you will have to supply the land for it, because the state Police are not looking to give up their barracks. I can hear the elections now.... "We need a Police dept to bring the crime rates back to where they were in 2014!! Oxford residents deserve to be safe" Scaring people into spending more money as many politicians have done over the last decade on every level of government.
But wait there's positive note there.... Oxford residents will get a new Library!! Great.. Now the town of Oxford and its taxpayers will be the tenants of this developer... He will build the library on his property and we get to rent it from him FOREVER.. what a nice deal worked in.. I've never heard of a town's local library not in a town owned building on municipal property..
Yes Oxford needs to grow, but not over night and not so fast and not to the benefit of one developer all at the taxpayers burden... When Oxford grows it should grow in a way that enhances the quality of life of the taxpayer...
I might be off about that Library, but IM not wrong about the "maybe revenue" they are dangling in front of you, the increase in crime, the burden on town roads which must be widened, the loss in property values and most importantly the financial cost to the taxpayers and the cost of losing what is a quiet and peaceful place to raise a family... Which BTW, there aren't many places left.
If you need more than Oxford has to offer, then move.. Move to Milford, Stratford, or Fairfield... they have grown and kept growing and IM sure you will be able to find a great deal on a house in those locations... The list of foreclosure and short sales grows daily in those communities as they find their home values under water. All of these towns taxes have experienced increase after increase in crime and taxes following years of retail growth!!
These are only a few reasons why it is a bad idea.... I could rant all day, but I hope you get the point!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
