On Wednesday, Feb. 21, Wilton’s Planning and Zoning Commission and Architectural Review Board/Village District Design Advisory Committee came together (via Zoom) for a candid discussion of the issues that have complicated the groups’ collaboration. GOOD Morning Wilton covered the background of the matter in a special report published yesterday.
Over two-and-a-half hours of conversation, the mood was at times tense but the discussion focused on improving the relationship between the two entities. Although the meeting was ostensibly a chance for P&Z commissioners to interview the current members of the ARB/VDDAC, all of whom are seeking reappointment, it also served as a forum to air frustrations about the existing process. The commissioners reiterated multiple times that the ARB/VDDAC should focus on the specific design elements they have a mandate to review, which include building materials, landscaping, scale and context within the surrounding neighborhood, and signage and lighting.
These topics are, in fact, the matters generally discussed during the monthly ARB/VDDAC meetings, but several commissioners expressed that the workload of their volunteer P&Z roles makes it difficult to follow the discussions at the advisory group as well. The general consensus was that the current system for communicating to P&Z what elements of a project ARB/VDDAC has already discussed with applicants is insufficient.
“This might be a shock to a lot of people, but I don’t have a lot of time to sit and follow all the ARB meetings,” Commissioner Chris Pagliaro said. “We all have lives and businesses and families.”
Sam Gardner, Vice Chair of ARB/VDDAC, noted that the time commitment and “burdensome” nature of the work may be a factor in the increasing difficulty that both groups have had in finding new candidates.
The discussion ended on a warm note as both sides concluded by thanking the Planning and Zoning Department staff, including Town Planner Michael Wrinn, for their time and effort. A few straightforward changes were proposed to improve the groups’ communications with one another, including the following:
- Commissioner Anthony Cenatiempo suggested that ARB/VDDAC frame its reports in a standardized checklist format, to better communicate to P&Z Commissioners which topics under its purview have been reviewed and approved by ARB/VDDAC, and what concerns if any are unresolved;
- Town Planner Michael Wrinn offered that P&Z staff can share ARB’s reports with P&Z more prominently than the placement they have previously received in the materials file that each commissioner receives ahead of a meeting; and
- Vice Chair Melissa-Jean Rotini suggested that ARB/VDDAC create a standard preamble explaining to applicants that further design review may take place at the P&Z level.
During the Feb. 12 meeting of P&Z, Chair Rick Tomasetti seemed to signal a willingness to consider not appointing the ARB/VDDAC and potentially outsourcing the work of VDDAC to an outside design consultant. That idea appears to be off the table, at least for now.
In an exchange with Wrinn, Tomasetti spoke to the original thought process behind creating ARB in 2019 and what may have changed since then. “At the time, we were really looking to find a way to have an Architectural Review Board and now all these years later, I’m questioning whether or not it should have been done in a different way. And I want to hear your thoughts on it in terms of Village District versus ARB and what the commission should be looking for moving forward?”
Wrinn began to explain that, at least for VDDAC, the involvement of state statute means, “that one you’re not getting rid of.” Tomasetti interjected, “I’m not looking to get rid of anything, I just want to clarify what it is.”
One source of contention that does not seem to have cooled down is the application by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to redevelop the long-vacant property at 241 Danbury Rd. This project (which was profiled in yesterday’s special report) was raised four separate times during the meeting. Tomasetti used part of his interview time with members of ARB/VDDAC up for reappointment to ask John Doyle for his opinion on the final product and process that led to it.
Before beginning, Tomasetti noted that since the application was no longer active in the land use approval process, “I think I can speak on it.” It was the first time he discussed it in the context of commission business, as he had recused himself from the deliberations while P&Z considered the project. The LDS Church purchased a portion of the property from an LLC for which Tomasetti was the managing member. The surrounding lots also belong to Tomasetti and his architecture practice operates out of an adjoining building, making him the future meeting house’s primary neighbor.
Doyle’s response suggested that he was unaware that the commissioners had been displeased with the design of the proposal and agreed to approve it only after Wrinn explained that the Town risked being brought to court in violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA.)
“My only real experience with it was when it came to us as an ARB,” Doyle said. “They did a really nice job of presenting the project and they listened to all our comments and they made changes and they came back several times. They were very accommodating. Then Planning and Zoning took it from there and evidently, approved everything. So I don’t have a lot of deep experience with it.”
Still unfinished is the business of appointing an ARB/VDDAC to serve out the next two-year term, which begins Mar. 1. Tomasetti raised the point that a system of staggered terms where only half of the seats expire in a given year would be an improvement as far as good governance. This year, the only members under consideration are the current members of ARB/VDDAC, all of whom expressed interest in serving again. The current ARB/VDDAC Chair Rob Sanders will reach his term limit of 10 years before this new two-year term is up, which he pointed out could help with the transition to a staggered appointment schedule.
Reappointments to the VDDAC and recommendations for reappointments to the ARB (which must be voted on by the Board of Selectmen) will be handled in executive session during the Monday, Feb. 26 regular P&Z meeting.
As for whether all five current members of ARB/VDDAC will be appointed again, the outcome remains unclear. Earlier in the night, during one of several tense back-and-forths between Sanders and Rotini, Sanders described a handbook he was developing to help applicants better understand the review process. He called it a primary goal he would be working on before his term limit is reached later this year, at which point Rotini interjected:
“If you are reappointed.”