Ansonia’s Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously Tuesday to deny a controversial subdivision application because they said it was “incomplete.”
But that doesn’t mean the project — to put a 10-home subdivision on a 14-acre property off Castle Lane — is dead.
The developer, Mark Romano, and his lawyer, Dominick Thomas, disagreed. Now they have to decide whether to file a new application — or take the commission to court.
“We’re going to have to take a look at it,” Thomas said. “I have to discuss with my client and look at the research whether or not we go the route of automatic appeal or we apply.”
The commission’s move killed a public hearing on the application that had been planned for Monday. About 30 members of the public were there for the hearing.
Background
Romano’s limited liability company bought the land for $250,000 in November 2010, according to city land records.
The development was first proposed as a 23-home subdivision in August 2011.
But after opposition from about 50 neighbors over traffic and possible water table depletion the commission denied the application in 2011.
Romano appealed in court, but a judge sided with the commission.
He has been retooling the plans since, and had an “informal discussion” with the commission about developing the land last year before filing an official application in May to build 10 homes there, less than half of what was originally proposed.
Application Denied, Sort Of
Instead of holding a public hearing on the plans, Joseph Jaumann, the commission’s chairman, said David Elders, a planning consultant who reviewed the application for the commission, deemed it incomplete.
The plans submitted did not include a letter from state environmental officials regarding the property’s sewer line, or detailed plans about the grading of driveways and the construction sequence for the project, he said.
Jaumann suggested denying the applying so Romano can submit it again.
Thomas asked if he could respond, and said Monday’s hearing was the first he heard of any issues with the application. He said he checked in with the city engineer last week.
“We’ve never seen any report, never been contacted,” he said. “I think it’s extremely unusual to do this without ever calling us and informing us these are your positions … These issues have never been raised before with us.”
Thomas asked the commission to take a brief recess during which he and Romano could look at Elders’ comments.
He pointed out that the application had been filed in May.
“This is very unusual to throw this at us with all the time you had,” Thomas said.
Click the play button on the video above to see some of the back-and-forth.
Ansonia Huddle
The commission then took a 15-minute break during which Jaumann, Vice Chairman Jared Heon, and Elders talked in a room across the hall, later joined by Corporation Counsel John Marini and Sheila O’Malley, the city’s economic development director.
That conversation — which took place in City Hall’s Erlingheuser Room, first with the door open, then with the door closed — was unusual, since the commission had technically voted on a motion from Heon “to take a short recess to deliberate and come back.”
Under the state’s Freedom of Information Act, public officials have to meet in public.
The FOI Act gives public agencies pretty wide latitude to confer privately with lawyers behind closed doors, but they have to take certain steps to do do.
The commission Monday didn’t vote to go into executive session, which is required when public agencies meet out of the public’s view, along with an explanation of why the secret discussion is necessary.
Marini said after the meeting that the closed-door conference was OK because there were two commissioners present, which didn’t constitute a quorum of the commission.
In 2011, Ansonia public officials ended a public meeting, then continued the public meeting in private by breaking into small groups to avoid having a quorum. Former Mayor James Della Volpe later apologized.
Marini said commissioners Monday were updating him “on a matter that could result in a claim,” since he did not attend the beginning of the hearing.
But he said the reasoning “could have been clarified” and said he’d review a recording of the meeting.
Still “Incomplete”
After the meeting went back on the record, Jaumann said “it’s still our sentiment at this point in time we have an incomplete application before us.”
He asked Thomas if he had any response.
Thomas said the application is complete and disputed Elders’ conclusions.
“The commission can do whatever it wishes,” he said, walking away from the podium. “Our position is the application is complete.”
The commission then denied the application “without prejudice,” which Jaumann said would allow the commission to waive a submission fee should Romano return with “complete” plans.
Reaction
Romano said after the meeting he doesn’t know what he’ll do.
“I’m in the dark,” he said.
“Usually the towns contact us prior (to public hearings with concerns),” he said. “We can always get the information instead of just denying it.”
After talking briefly with Elders, Thomas repeated his disagreement with the consultant.
Jaumann said he expects to see the plans revived.
“Hopefully they resubmit a complete application,” he said.
Asked to respond to Thomas’ comments, he referred a reporter to his remarks during the meeting.
“Staff and corporation counsel agree that (the application) is incomplete, so I’m going to defer to them,” Jaumann said.
