Hattertown Place—

Archaeological Review Required For Subdivision Site

By Andrew Gorosko

As part of its review of a five-lot residential subdivision proposed for a 21.3-acre site on Hattertown Road, the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) is requiring the developer to study whether the land holds archaeologically significant artifacts.

It would be the first time that the P&Z has required such an archaeological review, as allowed under the terms of land use regulations that the P&Z created in May 2009.

Hattertown, LLC, of Pawling, N.Y., is proposing the project known as Hattertown Place on a steeply rugged site at 22-24 Hattertown Road. The existing two lots at the site would be reconfigured into five lots. The property is on the west side of Hattertown Road, north of Hattertown Road’s intersection with Poverty Hollow Road.

The pending Hattertown Place application is the latest residential subdivision proposal that the developer has pursued for the property during the past several years. Earlier versions were smaller in scale. The current version of the project gained a wetlands protection permit last January from the Inland Wetlands Commission (IWC).

Past town rejections of previous development proposals resulted in court action by the developer in seeking to gain land use approvals. In March 2009, the IWC had rejected a four-lot version of the project proposed for 11 acres. That rejection drew a court appeal from the developer.

In February 2008, people who live near the site proposed for new home construction had raised a variety of concerns about the development application which was then pending before the P&Z. Those issues included traffic safety regarding motorist sight lines and school bus travel, as well as stormwater drainage control, water quality preservation, and open space access.

At a P&Z public hearing earlier this month, P&Z members voted 4-to-1 to require the developer to hire an archaeologist perform a basic review of the property. P&Z member Dennis Bloom dissented.

P&Z member Daniel Cruson, who also is the town historian, had asked whether the developer had performed an archeological review.

Mr Cruson explained that he has heard that certain prehistoric Native American artifacts have been found in the past at the site proposed for development. Mr Cruson urged that an archaeological review be done at the site by a certified archaeologist.

In a July 27 letter to George Benson, the town director of planning and land use, Mr Cruson explains the requirements for an archaeological review in view of the presence of an 18th Century structure and a rock shelter alongside a watercourse at the site.

The land use regulations which were approved by the P&Z in May 2009 seek to preserve significant archaeologic, historic, and cultural features of land proposed for subdivisions and resubdivisions. Sites identified as being of archaeological, historical, or cultural interest would be subject to progressively more levels of research, depending upon the relative quality of a site.

The intent of the rules is to have subdivision sites and resubdivision sites designed to preserve all significant historic, archaeologic, cultural, and natural features.

If a development site holds special merit, the applicant would be required to protect significant areas through permanent preservation easements that would provide perpetual rights for limited archaeological research.

An approved subdivision map would delineate areas to be preserved and protected from development and also specify the conditions for those areas’ use. The applicant would be responsible for covering all costs related to a preservation program.

Site Development

At the public hearing, engineer John McCoy of JFM Engineering, Inc, of Ridgefield, representing the applicant, described the developmental details of the project.

The developer would provide more open space on the site than is required by the P&Z’s open space regulations, he said. The 4.7 acres of proposed open space on the site represents about 22 percent of the property, compared to the P&Z’s 15 percent minimum open space requirement, he noted. Also, the property would hold a 3.4-acre conservation easement. Thus, about 8.1 acres of the site would be protected from development.

Based on recommendations from the town engineer, the developer modified the stormwater drainage control plans for the site, Mr McCoy said. The applicant is in the final review stages of the project’s design with the town engineer, Mr McCoy added.

P&Z Chairman Lilla Dean noted the severe topography of the site at its frontage line with Hattertown Road. There is a 16-foot-high drop-off at the road’s edge, she said. Such terrain will require the developer to construct engineer-certified retaining walls, she said. Also, site development will require the placement of much clean earthen fill, she added.

Ms Dean noted, “Economic times are tough.”

The chairman said she is unhappy about the amount of expensive engineering that it will take to develop the rugged site for home construction. The building lots that will be created will not be attractive lots, she added. The adjacent roadway is a busy street, she added.

 Ms Dean said that the P&Z has experienced problems with some developers during the past several years who start their projects and then stop work. There are four local projects in which site development began and trees were removed, after which the developers stopped work with the projects remained undone, she said.

P&Z member Robert Poulin noted that the Hattertown Place site holds some beautiful large old-growth trees.

Mr McCoy responded that each of the lots on the site would be individually, sequentially developed as specified by the IWC to minimize the physical disturbance on the overall site at any given time.

The site holds a 1,400-foot-long common boundary with an 11-acre open space area that is owned by the Newtown Forest Association (NFA), a local land conservation group.

NFA President Robert Eckenrode said the NFA considers the creation of the Hattertown Place subdivision an opportunity for the conservation group to obtain better public access to its adjacent open space preserve.

Mr McCoy said the developer would consider reconfiguring the proposed open space on the subdivision site.

Also, Mr Eckenrode expressed concerns about the water quality of the stormwater runoff at the residential development.

Resident Vincent Brunelli of 42 Hattertown Road raised some concerns about aspects of the development project.

P&Z members are expected to resume the Hattertown Place public hearing at an upcoming session.