Log In


Reset Password
Archive

Proposed Sandy Hook Center Multifamily Complex Spurs Opposition

Print

Tweet

Text Size


Proposed Sandy Hook Center Multifamily Complex Spurs Opposition

By Andrew Gorosko

A developer is seeking preliminary zoning rule changes from the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) that would allow him to proceed with site planning to create a multifamily housing complex on Church Hill Road, near Sandy Hook Center.

The housing concept, however, is drawing some opposition from nearby residents.

Developer Guri Dauti wants to build a housing complex on approximately four acres at 95 and 99 Church Hill Road. The site is on the north side of Church Hill Road, west of Church Hill Road’s intersection with Dayton Street.

Mr Dauti is seeking zoning rule changes that would reduce the required lot area for “affordable housing” complexes in a location where a public water supply and sanitary sewer service are available. The site has access to both public utilities.

Also, Mr Dauti is seeking P&Z approval to rezone a portion of the property from EH-10 zoning to R-2 zoning. EH-10 zoning is designated for elderly housing; R-2 zoning is intended for general residential use.

To be provided with the construction density bonuses, which the P&Z has created to encourage the construction of local affordable housing, a developer must designate at least 30 percent of the units in a complex as “affordable housing,” meaning that at least 30 percent of units must be rented or sold to families that meet certain income limits.

 If the P&Z approves the requested zoning rule changes, Mr Dauti would then also need P&Z site development plan approvals, plus other development approvals, for the project. Detailed site planning for a project typically is not done until preliminary zoning rule changes are obtained.

Mathematically, Mr Dauti’s conceptual plans for the site could result in up to 16 housing units there, but in practical terms, there probably would be fewer units in such a complex. It is unclear if the proposed housing units would be for sale or for rent.

In a January 28 letter to the P&Z, attorney William Denliger, representing Mr Dauti, writes, “We believe that due to the location of the parcel and the availability of sewer and water [utilities], that affordable housing would be the highest and best use for the land.”

The town contains one other housing complex that was constructed under the provisions of the affordable housing regulations, Riverview Condominiums, a 49-unit condominium complex off Bryan Lane, near Sand Hill Plaza. Riverview contains 13 condos that are designated as affordable housing. Because Riverview’s developers applied to construct the site under the terms of state regulations on affordable housing, not the town’s affordable housing regulations, only 25 percent of the Riverview condos, not 30 percent, are designated as affordable housing. 

Mr Dauti’s requested regulatory changes for a Sandy Hook Center multifamily complex are scheduled for a P&Z public hearing at 7:30 pm, Thursday, April 3, at Canaan House at Fairfield Hills.

Opposition

The proposal for a Sandy Hook Center multifamily complex, however, does not sit well with some nearby residents.

Megan Williams of 82 Church Hill Road said March 26 she is leading the opposition to the proposal, noting that it would be built in the middle of a historic neighborhood.

Ms Williams said many Sandy Hook Center area residents plan to attend the April 3 P&Z hearing to express their concerns.

“It would further destroy the landscape of our hamlet, as well as hinder the spirit and goals of the current revitalization project in Sandy Hook [Center],” according to Ms Williams.

“As homeowners in Sandy Hook, we are fighting to help preserve what’s left of Church Hill’s historic landscape,” she added.

The presence of a housing complex would increase traffic in what is already a congested area, she said, adding that such a complex would damage the area’s aesthetics. “It would be a huge eyesore,” she said.

Comments
Comments are open. Be civil.
0 comments

Leave a Reply