Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Sale topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends sale of 92-acre Middletown parcel to state for veterans cemetery expansion
Summary
The commission voted to recommend that the city convey a roughly 92-acre parcel (Map Lot 42-0183) and a maintenance easement to the State of Connecticut so the state can expand the nearby Veterans Cemetery; staff described a phased plan and wetlands constraints.
Get email alerts on the Land Sale topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The commission voted to recommend that the city convey a roughly 92-acre parcel (Map Lot 42-0183) to the State of Connecticut for expansion of the county Veterans Cemetery and to grant the state a maintenance easement.
Staff presenting for applicant agent Christopher Fort said the property is “92 acres owned by the city Middletown” and sits about a half-mile from the existing Veterans Cemetery on Bow Lane. The presentation included conceptual maps and a preliminary phasing plan; staff said phase one would use the northern portion of the site and could be completed in “3 to 5 years,” with development moving southeast over time. Staff also noted the site contains wetlands and that the city would retain a portion of the parcel while granting a maintenance easement to the state.
Commissioner Sebastian Giuliano asked whether restrictive covenants limit other uses and whether the proposal affects the city’s Plan of Conservation and Development. Giuliano said the parcel is “subject to restrictive covenants, so there's pretty much no other practical use,” and staff responded that the cemetery plan would not affect the city’s development plan and that passive recreation and public access would likely be improved compared with the site’s current condition.
A motion to recommend approval under CGS 8-24 for the sale and conveyance of a maintenance easement was made, seconded and approved by voice vote.
The recommendation now proceeds to whatever next steps are required by state review under CGS 8-24; the commission did not set conditions beyond the maintenance-easement arrangement discussed.
