Grace Farms Seeks Changes in Re-Filed P&Z Application; Neighbor’s ‘Conflict of Interest’ Claim Targets Chairman

As its resubmitted application goes before the Planning & Zoning Commission this week, Grace Farms is seeking to redefine parts of the town’s approval in ways that would allow for more people than the town body had envisioned on its vast campus. A key piece of P&Z’s heavily conditioned September approval calls for Grace Farms to limit how many times it may have large numbers of people on its site—for example, one condition specifies that it may have 500 to 1,200 people on the site no more than six days per year. In a proposed rewrite of those conditions, Grace Farms is seeking to apply those limits to guests at specific events, rather than total people on site. As such, those visiting Grace Farms for reasons not tied to the events—for example, to walk the property, view its celebrated River Building, eat lunch in its cafeteria, work in the library or sip tea—would not count toward the limit. The changes would “clarify” that P&Z’s limits apply “to identified/planned events, as intended, and not to non-event daily usage by church or Foundation staff, or general public visits, which are monitored by the availability of parking on site,” according to Grace Farms’s proposed changes.

Grace Farms’ Neighbor Files Lawsuit Seeking To Reverse P&Z’s Approvals

Saying the Planning & Zoning Commission’s recent approvals of Grace Farms’ closely followed applications will hurt them financially and threaten residential zones in New Canaan, a neighbor of the Lukes Wood Road organization on Monday filed a lawsuit in state Superior Court seeking to reverse those decisions. According to complaints filed on behalf of Smith Ridge Road residents Timothy Curt and Dona Bissonnette by attorney David Sherwood of Glastonbury-based Moriarty, Paetzoid & Sherwood, the neighbors are “aggrieved by the action of” P&Z, because their property “is adversely affected by” changes to New Canaan’s zoning regulations. The lawsuit refers to amendments to the regulations that allow an applicant to seek multiple principal uses for their properties—something Grace Farms wanted in order to be categorized not only as a religious institution but also as a philanthropic agency and club. “The amendments allow applications for multiple principal uses in residential zones and encourage the expansion of commercial and institutional uses in residential zones, to the detriment of established residential uses,” according to the complaint. Further, the complaint says, the plaintiffs are “aggrieved” by P&Z’s decision because they’ve “suffered and will suffer economic damage as a result of the regulation changes and their implementation on the abutting property of Grace Farms Foundation Inc.”

The neighbors are seeking for the court to reverse P&Z decision on the text changes—as well as to nullify the commission’s approval of Grace Farms’ amended special permit application—and to be awarded costs and “such other relief as the court deems appropriate.”

P&Z by a 5-4 margin approved the text amendment application at its July 25 meeting.

Judge Denies Grace Farms’ Bid To Dismiss Parts of Lawsuit Filed Against Organization, President

A state Superior Court judge last week denied Grace Farms’ bid to dismiss parts of a lawsuit brought by neighbors who say the organization and its president are responsible for sediment, silt and turbid water entering a wetlands, stream and pond on their properties during construction of the Lukes Wood Road facility. Starting in September 2013, Grace Farms violated a permit issued by the New Canaan Inland Wetlands Commission in several ways, including by failing to control storm water run-off, failing to hire an independent site monitor and failing to notify the town about problems of erosion and siltation, according to a complaint brought last June on behalf of two abutting neighbors by East Berlin, Conn.-based attorney Janet P. Brooks. Attorneys had argued on behalf of Grace Farms and the organization that those neighbors lack the standing to sue for violations of an Inland Wetlands permit because they’re individuals and not the issuing agency, according to a decision filed April 10 by Judge Marshall K. Berger. Yet “as abutting landowners, the plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged that they are personally aggrieved by the Grace defendants’ failures to comply with the conditions and that these failures have adversely affected the plaintiffs’ property and their use and enjoyment of it,” Berger wrote. The judge continued: “Indeed, the plaintiffs’ interest in insuring that the Grace defendants did not violate the conditions of the permit could not be greater given that the plaintiffs’ property is downstream and that alleged discharges have occurred and continue to occur … therefore, the motion to dismiss count two is denied.”

In all, Brooks on behalf of her clients—Smith Ridge Road residents Timothy Curt and Dona Bissonnette—included five counts in the original complaint.

Letter: A Look at the (Possible) Future of Grace Farms

To the Editor:

As an interested observer of the Grace Farms application before the Planning & Zoning Commission I believe that too few New Canaanites appreciate what is at stake. Below is a future news article we may see if Grace Farms succeeds in obtaining the approval it seeks. “October 15, 2017 

“Grace Farms Conference and Nature Center For Good (formerly Grace Farms) announced today at its second anniversary celebration that it has signed an agreement to become the home to the newly established United Nations Center for Social Justice and Criminal Rehabilitation. In connection with the establishment of this new center, Grace Farms will dedicate its entire 80-acre campus to this important global effort. “The transformation of the campus was made possible by the approval earlier this year of the application by Grace Farms Foundation to allow broader use of the facility than the religious institution use upon which it was originally permitted to be constructed.