On Thursday, April 2, Newtown Planning & Zoning Commission held its first hybrid meeting and discussed two applications. The first, application 26.03 by Newtown Community Center, is for the construction of a new outdoor, asphalt basketball court adjacent to the existing playground.

The court would measure 84 by 50 feet, and require no additional lighting, and no additional parking spaces. Matt Ariniello, director of Newtown Community Center, presented this application to the commission.

After Ariniello’s brief presentation, Connie Widmann, acting chair for April 2’s meeting, asked if commissioners had any questions for the applicant. Commissioner Roy Meadows asked if there would be bleachers or seats around the court.

Ariniello responded that two benches will be included within the 84 by 50-foot space.

Meadows then asked if there would be additional lighting, and Ariniello responded no, and that the courts will close at dusk like the playground.

Meadows asked about drainage for the court.

“That field is a little bit difficult because that houses the connections to the Emergency Operations Center, so all the fiber connections that go from the Municipal Center run across that field. Public Works has put in significant drainage over the last couple years to improve the surface, so it will be connected to the drains that were installed by Public Works,” Ariniello replied.

Alternate Commissioner Charlie Gardner asked about the orientation of the court, and Ariniello said it is oriented to preserve as much open space as possible.

Commissioner Don Mitchell asked if the Fairfield Hills Authority had seen the application. Commissioner Peter Schwarz, who also sits on the Fairfield Hills Authority, answered that they had seen it and it was approved by the authority. He said that the authority agreed that it is the “best possible use” of this space for “right now.”

There was a brief discussion about parking, but Ariniello said that when the parking lot was repaved last year, there were an additional 22 parking spaces added for the community center, which negates the need to add parking for this application.

Widmann asked if anyone from the public would like to comment. Kinga Walsh, chair of Newtown Community Center Commission, asked the commission for support.

“It’s going to be a great asset to our programming, and also it is fully funded by donations, and we are very grateful for that,” Walsh said.

With no further comment, Widmann closed the public hearing and put the application to a vote. Gardner was seated as the alternate for the vote, which passed unanimously.

3 Taunton Ridge Road

Also discussed at the latest Planning & Zoning meeting was a parcel located at 3 Taunton Ridge Road. Application 26.05 is for a zone change for that parcel from an R-2 to an R-1 zone to “allow for the construction of a single-family dwelling.” There to represent the applicant was Attorney Charles Lichtenauer.

“Tonight I am here on behalf of Matt and Vicky Hawley, who are in contract to purchase 3 Taunton Ridge Road. They intend to use the property as a single-family residence,” Lichtenauer said. “Our request is to reclassify 3 Taunton Ridge Road from R-2 to R-1 as a narrow corrective amendment to allow a single-family residence consistent with the road’s prevailing pattern.”

Lichtenauer offered some facts about the property: the parcel is approximately 1.313 acres and it has been unchanged for six decades. Lichtenauer had a presentation that he went through, which included the scope of request and an area map that showed several other properties in the area that are zoned as R-1.

“Again, this is a limited map change, it only focuses on one property. No zoning text amendment is proposed, no other properties are included,” Lichtenauer said. Then he briefly discussed the “threshold conformity issue,” of which he said the lot is “currently nonconforming by area and not eligible for a zoning permit for a single-family dwelling.” By changing the zone, the 1.313-acre lot would “[exceed] the required minimum.”

Lichtenauer also explained that there is no other parcel in the area the applicants could acquire to create a two-acre lot for an R-2 zone. He continued explaining how the lot conforms with R-1 zoning, like the public road frontage, adequate depth and width to abide by regulations, and it is “not even constrained by unusual topography.”

Lichtenauer showed a map that displays the Taunton Ridge Road area. Taunton Hill Road, Lichtenauer said, is “largely R-2,” while Taunton Ridge Road “maintain[s] a R-1 characteristic throughout the road.” There are only two lots on Taunton Ridge Road that are zoned R-2, one being this subject lot and the other being an interior lot.

Lichtenauer’s arguments to rezone this property were that it “aligns with surrounding zoning,” “maintains scale and character,” and is “predictable land use.” He noted earlier in his presentation that the request would not “authorize additional units beyond a single-family residence, nor would it authorize commercial uses or propose physical alteration of the site at this stage.”

He continued in his presentation, saying that it is “orderly, low-density development,” and that this single-family home would align with the look of the area.

“As I said, this lot has been sitting vacant for 60 years. Wouldn’t it be great if Newtown could take some tax revenue from this parcel?” Lichtenauer asked the commission. He also recognized neighbors’ concerns, stating that there are no “adverse impacts” on neighboring properties, and thanked the commission for its time.

Widmann then asked the commissioners if they had any questions.

Commissioners’ Questions

Mitchell asked Lichtenauer when the lot was created.

“That’s a great question,” Lichtenauer began. “We can’t determine the exact date that it was created. We know the lot was created in the 1950s, that’s as far as we’ve gotten.” Lichtenauer said that Planning & Zoning Commissions are able to determine whether or not a lot is “buildable,” and he was asking Newtown’s Planning & Zoning Commission to do so.

Gardner pointed out that a lot of the lots in the area are “completely non-conforming to the existing zoning.”

Meadows asked how large the lot adjacent to the north is. Lichtenauer replied 2.02 acres.

“Okay, my other question is, since this is a very narrow and long lot, how will a house sit on this and where will the septic system and the reserve be,” Meadows asked.

Lichtenauer said that at this stage, while the applicants are working with an architect, the application is only for the zone change, and those plans would have to come back to the commission.

Commissioner Barbara Manville raised concerns about the narrow nature of the lot, wondering if it could meet the setback requirements.

Lichtenauer agreed, saying it “of course it will be an abutting home.”

Widmann chimed in, “Which is not indicative of the neighborhood.” She also asked Lichtenauer about wetlands on the property. He said he is “aware of no wetlands” and a soil scientist has not yet studied the soil on the property.

Meadows said that the lot was “wet today,” and Widmann agreed, saying she has seen it “be wet myself.”

Gardner asked a few minutes later, “Currently, is there anything that can be built at all on this property lawfully?” Widmann and Lichtenauer responded “no,” and Widmann said on the tax records it is “deemed an unbuildable lot.”

Due to the lot’s age, land records have been hard to find, which leaves the date the property was subdivided unknown. This uncertainty leaves room for Lichtenauer to come before the commission and ask the lot to be ratified “as a buildable lot in connection with this application.”

The health director has also not commented on this application, which Widmann thinks is “very critical information for this application.”

Gardner said that it seems “strange that a vacant lot would have been deliberately made unbuildable.” Steve Maguire said the Land Use department can look into the property and find the history for not only the commission, but the applicants as well.

Widmann then opened the floor to public comment.

Public Comment

Bill Kneisel was the first to speak. He is a neighbor to this property and expressed opposition to the application. He acknowledged that everything that Lichtenauer said was accurate. He had two concerns while presenting to the commission, and those were the fact that he shares 450 feet of land with this parcel and “how did we get here today?”

Kneisel went through some of the history of the property, noting that the lot has been deemed unbuildable for several years and that previous applications for this lot have been denied. He shared a letter from the previous Land Use director who said that the lot is unbuildable. Kneisel said that Mr Robinson, the original owner of the property, split his property from east to west rather than north to south, which created this narrow lot. He thinks the owner did that for a reason and “didn’t leave any stone unturned.”

“The reason I’m here is I don’t understand how common it is for the board to undo the decisions of what boards have done in the past. I can tell you from living downwind from 3 Taunton Ridge … I have personally put in over 200 feet of drainage, trap rock, pipes, and I can’t harness the water. It’s a mess,” Kneisel said.

The next person to speak was Gina Pasquini. She is also a neighbor in the area and cited concerns about flooding. She approached the board to show them a video from the historic flooding on August 18, 2024.

“With all due respect to the attorney who presented for the parties, this is a wetlands. There is a water course that runs … through our yard,” Pasquini said. She explained that it is zoned R-4 SBC, or in other words, “River tine, four is intermittent flooding, SB is stream bed, and C is seasonal flooding, and I got that off the Connecticut DEEP GIS map.”

Pasquini also discussed the buckled asphalt in the area due to the amount of water and pointed out that this area abuts a wildlife preserve.

Barry Moller spoke next. He said, “I’d like to thank you for your services, but I think there’s a few things [as to] why this [zone change] should not be approved. First of all, it will be impactful upon the area. Two-thirds of the properties impacted by this amendment are R-2, this is not a property that’s sitting on a corner lot surrounded by R-1s.”

Moller said later on in his comments, “Now I don’t know how you’re gonna fit a septic system, setbacks, there’s a pool to the south of this property, so it’s essentially unbuildable. This is a bowling alley lot. They’re trying to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.” Moller also made a comment saying that he found it “compelling” that the applicants were not attending the meeting.

John Spies was the last to comment in-person. He believes this property is “a swamp,” and found it strange that lot surveys could not be produced as he recalls the area being surveyed a few months ago.

As Widmann was asking the other commissioners if they should close the public comment, Matt Hawley popped online to acknowledge that he was attending, but he and his family were feeling “pretty under the weather, so I decided to Zoom in.”

After Hawley’s comments, the commission made a motion to continue the public hearing to the next meeting, April 16, 7 pm, in the Newtown Municipal Center Council Chambers. The motion was approved unanimously.

=====

Reporter Sam Cross can be reached at sam@thebee.com.