Putting an end to rumors that the inclusion of mixed-use residential development at Fairfield Hills is a done deal, First Selectman Dan Rosenthal told The Newtown Bee this week that no decisions will be made until a public referendum on the subject is held next April.

Newtown’s top elected official was reacting to reports after the Fairfield Hills Master Plan Committee unanimously recommended future uses for the town-owned former state hospital campus include a possible mixed-use residential component. The committee convened about a year ago to review the existing master plan document, which guides reuse and development at the town-owned campus and will recommend updates to the plan to the Board of Selectmen.

That work included a survey that takes most of the possible future options for remaining institutional buildings on the campus into consideration. The public survey indicated that many residents opposed the idea of housing but desired development, he said. In the past year’s work, the committee also became concerned for safety because of empty and deteriorating buildings.

However, the first selectman points out, there is nothing in the survey related to the future of those remaining buildings if they are not part of a mixed-use development proposal.

“Residents should be reminded that the master plan review committee is staffed by citizen volunteers, and they did a great job with their survey and report,” Mr Rosenthal said. “But those survey results have to be viewed in respect to the fact that they leave out a big question about what the town should do with the remaining buildings.”

Concerns and misinformation circulating in the wake of released master plan revision recommendations has motivated Mr Rosenthal to hit pause as he and other officials plan community conversations on the mixed-use proposal and script one or more advisory questions that will likely appear on Newtown’s next budget ballot in late April 2020.

The first official presentation of the committee’s work and recommendations will be made to the Board of Selectmen during a regular meeting scheduled for Monday, August 19.

“But we will just be hearing the presentation,” Mr Rosenthal said. “There will be no voting or action on accepting the committee recommendations.”

The FFH master plan revisions, once and if approved by selectmen, would eventually go to the Planning & Zoning Commission for endorsement as well. But it appears now that neither of those panels will deliberate and vote on recommendations until after next April’s referendum.

Community Conversation #1

The first community conversation is scheduled for the evening of Monday, September 23, in the Newtown High School auditorium. This first gathering will be a forum for residents to review potential costs. Future community information sessions ahead of the referendum could include presentations from developers expressing interest in creating mixed-use conversions of one or more existing Fairfield Hills buildings; an analysis of demolition costs, and implications by one or more contractors that have already razed one or more of the larger institutional buildings on the campus; and any other ideas related to improving or enhancing the facilities and grounds.

“But holding a public referendum that is well-advertised, after a number of community conversations arming residents with complete and thorough information about all the options, is the only appropriate way to settle on future plans for Fairfield Hills once and for all,” Mr Rosenthal said. “It’s most important for the public to know without any question that the Board of Selectmen and the P&Z will not make any decision on the master plan proposals for Fairfield Hills until the public speaks.

“We want to get all the financial facts out there. Then, if residents do not support the mixed-use proposal, our option would be to move forward with likely plans for demolition,” he added. “This needs to be handled thoughtfully, but there are not a lot of other options.”

Based on two lengthy meetings on Thursday and Friday, July 11 and 12, the review committee members were unanimous — or nearly so — with their approval of several motions for recommendations, according to committee chair Deborra Zukowski.

“The need for housing as a component of commercial development was not for large developments; rather it is for the possibility of renovating a large, existing building like Cochran or Kent,” Ms Zukowski previously told The Newtown Bee.

The buildings would each cost the town approximately $4 million to demolish, she said, noting that Kent, in particular, has “very interesting architectural character that today’s construction can’t afford to replicate.” Her group understands that large development would potentially need a housing component, she added.

Mr Rosenthal agreed.

“We currently have several qualified parties who are interested, who have done these types of institutional to mixed-use projects elsewhere with great success,” Mr Rosenthal said. “And if it gets to the stage where the town moves into potential exploration of any mixed-use development, it still may not happen depending on a potential developer’s findings.”

Concerns Around Cost

Concerns, the first selectman said, are always related to cost — which has stymied prior plans to fast track bonding for building demolition.

“If we decide to demo a building like Kent House, it’s the remediation that is the issue. While the demo would run around $1 million, it will cost upwards of $3 million just to remediate before we can even begin taking the structure down,” Mr Rosenthal said. In the same breath, the first selectman, who is unopposed for reelection this November, said he is generally against the concept of Newtown taxpayers paying to demo and remediate to create a stage for possible re-use.

He said if the town spent $4 million to raze Cochran House and a retail business comes in to take over the site, it would take in excess of 40 years or more to generate enough property taxes to break even and would saddle two generations of local taxpayers with the debt service burden for the site prep.

“It’s clear that without some type of development, demo costs will fall on Newtown taxpayers, and every passing day means these buildings are deteriorating further,” he said. “So to those who suggest we simply wait ten years and then see what happens, it may not be an option if one of those building’s roofs cave in.

“And I don’t believe there is a white knight out there ready to ride in and absorb the full expense of remediating and redeveloping an existing building without historic preservation and housing incentives,” Mr Rosenthal added. “The decision may eventually be no housing, but my job is to help present all options about things that make sense, and fit into the vision of the master plan. It would be a disservice to our residents and taxpayers to not explore all those options.”

The first selectman suggested that re-using one or two buildings that would add a maximum of about 130 residential units in a mixed-use scenario could not only serve a growing public need for workforce housing, it could provide an opportunity for local police, educators, and public employees to reside in town, while at the same time addressing a state mandate on providing more housing of that nature.

In the end, Mr Rosenthal said the Master Plan Committee spent the better part of a year refining their latest proposal, but its community survey left unresolved what to do with the remaining buildings. And that open question must be resolved by public vote before any elected board moves to accept the committee’s recommendations.

Any resident who cannot make the August 19 presentation to selectmen is reminded they can watch the meeting streaming live, or after it concludes, by tuning in to a video stream available on the municipal website at newtown-ct.gov/minutes-and-agendas.