Does anyone know if there is any requirement that the applicant would need to be able to begin construction within a set period of time. The reason that I ask is that the town and other interested parties are being forced to devote considerable time, money, energy, etc. to an application that may, even if approved, not be able to be implemented for several years. If it is determined that the contamination will require several years to remediate, can consideration of the application be deferred until such time as the applicant would actually be able to implement its plan, if approved, within a reasonable period of time?
The reason that this question occurred to me is by thinking about how a building permit for something like an addition to a home works. If the application is approved and the town issues a building permit, the permit is only valid for a set period of time. I think it's a year. If it was known at the time of the application that it was impossible for the time limitations included in the permit to be followed, could the application be rejected until it was possible that it could be implemented?
Again, the issue seems be whether the town and others should be forced to engage in a process that could not result in a valid approval due to time limitations.
My guess is that there is a limit on such approvals because it would be unfair to require the town to approve something that would be built too far in the future to accurately assess its impact at that distant point in time.
I do not know the answer to your question, although it is an interesting one. On the other hand, would you not prefer to get this out of the way now? Do we really want this thing hanging over the heads of homeowners and homesellers for the next few years? Some of us in town would like to retire and sell our homes now. Your thoughts?
First let me be clear that I believe that the megachurch clearly has vast negative implications for the town which have been discussed on this and other forums at length. I also am leary of a scaled down megachurch because I do believe that it would try to grow in the future by whatever means available including adding additional stories or a parking garage if land were more limited (such as in a site sharing alternative).
I share your feeling about rather having the issue decided sooner rather than later. On the other hand, I would rather have the issue determined later if that would decrease the chances of having this monolith coming to fuition.
I do believe that there is a limit in terms of dollars and time that CC is prepared to invest in this application. Deferring consideration would allow additional time for CC to find a more suitable location. I imagine that they are aware of most possibilties at present but if they were required to wait a few years, better sites may come to their attention. That truly would be a win-win.
I essentially believe that CC's interest in the site is inversely related to the time required for the site to be available. Several years of environmental cleanup plus a potential for several more years for the courts to determine how the law would apply to this application would most likely be longer than CC would be prepared to wait. Just a guess on this, but it seems to make sense.
Well, I certainly do understand your points. Certainly we do not want to leave the door open by creating a compromise situation right now for the reasons that you have stated. Maybe you are right - - - we should just put it all off til it is cleaned up. I wonder if the cloud of uncertainty will be somewhat lifted off of the real estate values in town if we follow that track? I hope so. Things are pretty bad here right now in the Meriden area.
