Newtown’s Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) continued discussing proposed apartments in Hawleyville during its meeting at Newtown Municipal Center January 5. It also received an update about the work its subcommittee has done to create a new definition for warehouses in the town regulations.

P&Z members present were chair Dennis Bloom, Corrine Cox, Roy Meadows, Kersti Ferguson, Brian Leonardi, David Rosen, and Connie Widmann, as well as Land Use Agency Deputy Director of Planning Rob Sibley.

The first item on the agenda was the public hearing for Application 22.26 by Farrell Building Company. It was for a special exception for property located at 90 Mount Pleasant Road, so as to permit the construction of 200 rental apartments in ten buildings with associated driveways, parking, and clubhouse as shown on plans entitled “Site Development Plan Approval Drawings, Newtown Commons.”

Not listed was its joint application requesting a zone change for the property from industrial to residential.

Representing the applicant was Attorney Robert Hall.

“I was given permission at the end of the hearing three weeks ago to continue the hearings in order to evaluate the validity of the protest petition that has been filed, and that protest of course applies only to the change in zone and not to the special exception,” he said.

In the process of crafting a memo for the commission, Hall said he realized he did not file the notice for the change in zone application with the town clerk ten days before the start of the previous hearing.

With that in mind, he said he did not investigate the protest petition and instead focused on the paperwork issue.

“What that means is ... the commission could not have approved that change in zone as presented, because it’s a fatal defect. It’s incurable,” Hall said. “I spoke with the client, and the client authorized me to withdraw the zone change application and reapply, and I did so.”

The new zone change application will be heard at the next P&Z meeting on January 19.

“If there is a protest petition filed against that application, I don’t know if I’ll be able to react immediately,” Hall said. “But I have done a lot of research and I do know what was valid and what was invalid to the petition that was submitted.”

He noted the special exception component will need the zone change approval to be relevant. “We do not have any further evidence on the special exception application,” Hall said.

Commissioner Meadows asked what the Design Advisory Board recommendations were for the apartment buildings’ specific paint colors. Hall said he did not remember off-hand or if it is in the filed paperwork, but that he can get that information.

Clerk Helen Muro said that the Design Advisory Board has that information in its meeting minutes, so it can be provided to the P&Z.

Hall said, “My memory is coming back. I think I recall now that there was a discussion about the color scheme of the buildings being fairly similar to the plans down in Sandy Hook with variations in terms of the intensity, you can say, of the gray [color] scheme.”

Sibley brought up that they can get a copy of the Design Advisory Board’s information and that the board accepted the design as presented.

Commissioner Widmann asked if any modifications would need to be made to the current sewer system for this project, since it had been designed for industrial.

“I’m not aware of any limitation of use of sewer or sewer capacity related to it being solely for industrial or solely for commercial,” Hall said.

Public Comments

Bloom opened the conversation up for public participation.

The first person to speak was Newtown resident Don Leonard on behalf of Patrick Napolitano who could not be in attendance that evening. He read Napolitano’s three-page letter in opposition of the project, which is included with the meeting minutes.

It read, in part, “I have spoken of the dangerous traffic issues and the very real possibility of well contamination to homes on Whippoorwill Hill Road several times … I’ve not heard one word from Farrell about our safety or well-being, only the amenities this project will deliver for them and their tenants.”

Napolitano’s letter brought up his concerns and questions regarding risks to school children on buses, tax loss for the town, and the fuel used to heat the facility.

Newtown resident Mark Damico requested a third-party review for the traffic study, storm water management plan, environment, and financial analysis. For the storm water management plan, he noted that the project’s site plan changed throughout its time going through the town boards for review.

Specifically, a building was replaced by more parking and that it is near the wetlands.

Newtown resident Sherry Bermingham reported that she did a free traffic study for the commission. She took images of the Mt Pleasant Road caution signs, which say, “Steep grade one mile, trucks use low gear” and “8% grade, trucks use lower gear.”

“This is what your traffic is going to be up against, and I wanted to submit that,” she said.

Newtown resident Michael Ricciardi asked if there has been a study or campaign to get people who want to do light industry there. Doing so could help develop the area as it is proposed in the regulations.

Sandy Hook resident Karen Martin said, “I think since the [zoning change] application has been withdrawn from the commission, it would be a good thing to send it back to Inland Wetlands. The fact that a building has been removed and impervious surface has been changed and added, I think the Inland Wetlands needs to take another look at this application.”

She also wanted to know where the regulations state that the P&Z has input concerning the paint colors of projects.

Newtown resident Elizabeth Lincoln voiced that she wanted to “impart some common sense.”

She expressed her concerns with Mt Pleasant Road traffic impacting Whippoorwill Hill Road. She added that she would like to see the proposed pool and clubhouse relocated to the other side of the project site, so that it is away from Whippoorwill Hill Road.

Lincoln said if housing would be considered for the property, she would rather see affordable elderly housing, which would eliminate the school bus issues residents have brought up.

“I just think we can do well with this, but I think we can do better than the way it is laid out now,” she concluded.

Damico asked if the petition he submitted at the last meeting met the 20 percent requirement with neighbor signatures. Sibley confirmed the petition was received and is part of the record.

Applicant Response

Hall responded, “The only authority for protest petitions that require the change in the voting requirement from a majority to two-thirds is for this change of zone. There is no statutory authority for a protest petition against a special exception that has any effect whatsoever. There could be 150 signatures on it, but that would not change the vote requirement.”

Sibley clarified Newtown’s regulations, pointing out that if 20 percent of the property owners within 500 feet of the property signed the protest petition, then the commission may grant the special exception “only upon the affirmative vote of at least four members of the commission.”

Hall said he will address that in the next hearing, because he does not believe it applies to the current application being discussed. Hall went on to talk about a letter from the Public Works Department which stated that there is “sufficient collection system capacity and waste water treatment capacity available … to handle this application.”

Muro was able to provide the Design Advisory Board’s meeting minutes discussed earlier, and to that Meadows said he finds the information “acceptable” and that he is “satisfied” with the board’s statements.

The public hearing was then closed, but no vote was made on the project.

Muro noted that the next meeting that will bring up this application and the resubmitted joint application will be conducted in the Newtown Community Center, not at the Newtown Municipal Center.

Warehouse Definition

The next item on the P&Z agenda that evening was the discussion of its subcommittee’s warehouse definition suggestions.

The subcommittee consisted of Bloom, Rich, and Leonardi. Leonardi spoke on behalf of the subcommittee to summarize the work they did.

“Within the M-2A section is the only area within the zoning regulations where the term ‘warehouse’ is not defined,” he said.

Leonardi noted that the group focused on how to remove the ambiguity, come up with a definition, and take into consideration input from the Newtown Neighbors Alliance LLC, a grassroots group of residents who were generally opposed to a warehouse and distribution center previously proposed in Hawleyville.

“By utilizing a uniform definition, we have to keep it sufficiently broad that we are not limiting the property rights of people who own property in industrial zones where a warehouse is permitted. We can’t take away property rights from people,” Leonardi said.

They decided on a definition that allows the property to be used as a traditional warehouse would be for storage of materials, as well as excluding certain materials, such as gasoline fuels. He also brought up that buffers were talked about.

Meadows said, “I’d like to commend the committee for their definition of a warehouse/distribution center … I thought they did an excellent job.”

He then inquired about changing wording in the proposed definition under §5.02.280 to “remain consistent” with the rest of the zones. After some discussion, the commission requested that Sibley edit the wording of §5.02.280 and the Warehouse/Distribution Center definition within §01.02 of the text amendment.

Once that is made, the draft text amendment can be brought back for further review.

The next P&Z meeting will be Thursday, January 19, at 7 pm in the Newtown Community Center.

Reporter Alissa Silber can be reached at alissa@thebee.com.