Chelsea Gardens Foundation, opponent continue court battle
The Norwich-based Chelsea Gardens Foundation is asking a New London Superior Court judge to require that a neighbor who has filed court action seeking an injunction to stop work on the project post a bond to cover potential damages if his suit were to fail.
Legal wrangling continued Thursday between the foundation and Butternut Drive resident Charles Evans, as attorneys for the two parties met privately with Judge Emmet Cosgrove and scheduled a telephone conference with the judge for next Tuesday, Attorney Keith Ainsworth, representing Evans, said after the session.
Attorneys representing Chelsea Gardens left New London Superior Court without comment Thursday.
Along with the motion seeking a bond, the attorneys, as expected, also filed a motion with the court asking that the city of Norwich — which leased the 80 acres of Mohegan Park land to the foundation in 1994 — be added as a party in the case.
Evans filed suit in July seeking an injunction after the foundation cleared six acres of trees and brush from land this spring in the area defined on the master plan as the first phase of the proposed project.
The tree-cutting, which is now completed, is at the heart of the dispute.
Foundation officials and city planning officials said the tree cutting does not count as beginning the project work.
The site development plan for the project expired in May, because no work had begun within the two-year allowed time frame after permit approvals.
But Evans claims the tree cutting is illegal since the permits have expired.
Ainsworth said he has proposed a temporary stay to stop all work, including removal of wood already cut and the placement of any vehicles by contractors on the property.
In turn, he said, the foundation’s attorneys on Thursday asked for a confidentiality agreement on the case to prevent him from discussing it with the media. Neither requested orders were put in place Thursday, Ainsworth said.
In the foundation’s motion for a bond, foundation attorney Jeffrey McDonald argued that Chelsea Gardens Foundation has only done tree cutting on the property and “is unaware of any activity that fails to comply with approved plans” or state statutes.
He wrote that if Evans’ temporary injunction is granted, the foundation faces potential financial harm and would lose “considerable and valuable time for implementing the city-approved plans.”
McDonald also argued that Evans is among a group of opponents who “will seemingly stop at nothing to put a stop or halt the progress of the development.”
McDonald did not include a requested dollar amount in the bond request.
“Further, Chelsea Gardens will lose interest from other donors that would otherwise support an active and vibrant development,” McDonald wrote. “Considering that Chelsea Gardens is a nonprofit organization composed of volunteer members of the board of directors, it relies greatly upon third-party donations and grants.”
Ainsworth said he will object to both the motion for the bond and to add the city as a party to the suit, which he called a delay tactic.
Ainsworth disagreed that tree cutting doesn’t count as starting the work and claimed the vehicles and cutting was done in wetland areas.
Chelsea Gardens officials countered that project engineers have certified that no work was done outside the defined phase 1 project area.
Norwich Corporation Counsel Michael Driscoll said Thursday he has not reviewed the motion to add the city as a party, and the city would file an appearance in the case if the court approves the motion.
Driscoll pointed to language in the Chelsea Gardens’ lease with the city that allows the foundation to carry out work on the property.
“It’s city-owned land, no question,” Driscoll said. “There’s a lease in there. It doesn’t automatically mean the city should be a party.”
c.bessette@theday.com
Twitter: @Bessettetheday
Comment threads are monitored for 48 hours after publication and then closed.