Do we want more commercial enterprises on Main Street? Should we protect and preserve our historic village as it is? Would we want to adopt rules that dictate what types of dwellings can be built in the center of town? Or what goods and services we could provide there? These were among the questions addressed at a special meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission on October 22 to hear residents’ views on the development, or the preservation, of the Hampton Hill Historic District.
The meeting was an initial step in implementing the Plan of Conservation and Development, which has as a goal to: “Encourage new commerce within Town that will enhance the Town’s small town and semi-rural character”. The Plan also lists as an objective to: “Evaluate the creation of a new village zone in the village center with opportunities for limited small-scale retail business and offices.” This language was included in the Plan after a 2015 survey of Hampton residents showed that 65% of respondents approved of more retail opportunities in the town, with 65% identifying offices as a desirable expansion and 62% supporting light manufacturing. Expansion of businesses in the village was fairly split among participants.
Currently, the village is residentially zoned with cottage industries permissible within dwellings. Three properties – the General Store, an insurance building, and the Post Office — were established prior to the Town’s adoption of zoning regulations. Expansion of commercial development in the village would require rezoning the area.
The meeting started with a presentation by Michael Lucas, a student intern from Central Connecticut State University, who provided an overview of the different types of tools a municipality may employ to regulate development. The least restrictive of these is Design Guidelines, which provide flexible recommendations, not legally enforceable, on several aspects of historic preservation. A Design Review Board is established, but acts only in an advisory capacity. Conversely, Design Overlay Zones, regulatory districts with specific design standards, are enforceable through zoning regulations.
A third option, the establishment of a Historic District, would preserve and protect dwellings and places associated with the history of the town in order to promote “the educational, cultural, economic, and general welfare of the public”. Approval would require a two-thirds majority of property owners in the potential district, with the town assuming the responsibilities and costs of management. Expanding upon this, Village Districts, another option presented, protect the landscape as well as the structures visible from the street. State statutes authorize towns to adopt ordinances for Village Districts, which require that all construction, or reconstruction, be subject to regulations. Some residents observed that this appeared to be the preferred option of the presentation, as evidenced in the lengthy list of positive aspects which included: flexibility; a broad range of power over design control; architectural review of proposed development by a third party; inclusion of all elements of design; legal enforceability. The negatives of a Village District, subjectivity and multiple steps for property owners and applicants, were also noted.
A final consideration, the option of doing nothing, avoids placing regulations on property owners, Town Planner John Guszkowski explained, however it greatly limits protection and historical preservation in the district. As it stands now, in the event of a catastrophic occurrence, a dwelling could be replaced with one of an entirely different style, and though implausible, the General Store could legally be replaced by a Dollar General, he said.
Some of the people who live in the village echoed these concerns. Richard Prario spoke of the importance of maintaining styles compatible with the Colonial, Georgian, Queen Anne, Italianate, Greek and Gothic Revival architecture notable in the village, and realtor Angelika Hansen said that prospective homeowners looking at houses in the vicinity of the General Store have expressed unease over a future use of the building, an uncertainty that serves as a deterrent to purchasing property in the center of town.
Though most of those who spoke were Main Street residents, two of the most vocal were not. Town historian Bob Burgoyne stated that economic development and historic preservation is an oxymoron, and reminded everyone that the front lawns on Main Street are State owned and could easily be converted into parking lots to accommodate retail establishments. Gay Wagner suggested that the town conduct a marketing study to determine the need and the desire for increasing commercial enterprises in the center of town. She noted the difficulties past businesses in the village have met, and suggested the town look into purchasing additional property for businesses on commercially zoned Route 6.
Those who spoke supported Mr. Burgoyne’s and Ms. Wagner’s positions on protecting the village, which Marny Lawton summarily called, “a gem.” PZC Chairman Kevin Grindle announced that the next step in the process will be the development of a draft set of regulations pertaining to each one of the options, in keeping with the theme common to the discussion: How do we protect what we have?
Dayna McDermott