Cherenzia Attached Housing Subdivision Not Done Deal

The law gives the Planning and Zoning Commission until Nov. 18 to make its decision on the contentious Crescent Club for the site near Mary Hall and Greenhaven roads in Pawcatuck. And by all accounts, the board will take it to the wire.

Several hours of deliberation Tuesday by commission members outlined some of the major issues the board will have to contend with during its decision-making process, including , but one thing was immediately clear; the majority agreed that the developer not only has the right to build, but the plan fits zoning regulations.

“I don’t think there’s a fatal flaw that would have us deny it,” said member Curtis Lynch. “They have the right to develop…and it could be a lot worse.” Lynch was referring to the option to create an affordable housing subdivision that would essentially strip the board of its authority to approve and regulate.

The housing project is being proposed by Cherenzia Companies for the Richard C. Panciera Remainder Charitable Trust. Nearly 700 opponents, mostly neighbors and abutters, signed a petition for the 58-acre site. Over the course of the application process, scores attended PZC public hearings and some 20 people, including candidate for f, one of the most vocal members of the opposition, spoke vehemently against the proposal.

“But they meet the regulations,” said commissioner Rob Marseglia. “…You have to separate the personal from the professional. If we were to deny this without reasonable reasons, without something that was concrete—it meets the Plan for Conservation Development (and) it meets the regulations—if we were to deny this without cause the applicant could go around and sue the town and this ends up in court, protracted with fees spent unnecessarily and they’ll end up getting to do it anyway, or worse, the affordable housing they threatened.”

And while acting chair Ben Tamsky said the commission was sensitive to the opposition—“I don’t think any of us can minimize the impact of the opposition; we weigh that testimony carefully," — member John Prue held that despite the outcry, the plan follows all the rules.

“We’re still compelled by law,” he said. “If we were writing the rules and got 700 signatures on a petition,” that would be powerful. “That’s not what we’re doing here. I recognize the effort, but the [developer] has vested rights under the law.”

That said, Prue and the other commission members spent much of their time Tuesday going over the regulations on excavation, seeking to find consensus on whether or not they can enforce a rule the town attorney said is not applicable but could likely still be implemented, albeit in part. Marseglia was frustrated: “Did we pay for this [opinion]? We should get our money back. It’s just not clear.”

The issue of blasting and the subsequent excavation and processing of the rock will likely be the focus of the next PZC deliberation on the condo plan slated for Nov. 1 with the Nov. 15 meeting the last opportunity for deliberation and, the final vote.

A number of plan opponents sat in the audience Tuesday night and at least some were not heartened by what they heard; collective sighs were heard during the deliberation.

Project attorney Thomas J. Ligouri Jr. was joined by project engineer Sergio Cherenzia and Cherenzia owner Sam Cherenzia, though in the audience, none were permitted to speak or address the board given all public comment has been officially closed.