The second discussion at the August 6 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting regarded application 26.13 by GRC Construction for a subdivision located at 9 Beechwood Drive “to subdivide the site into three single-family building lots.”

Greg Carnrick, owner of GRC Construction and applicant, has had two other public hearings. His first hearing was continued due to an incomplete application, and the second hearing was continued due to not having comments from John Curtis, town engineer.

Carnrick addressed the commission, saying, “It is my understanding that, with the exception of engineering review, that all the departments do not have an issue with approval.”

He then went over what he had done since the last meeting, which included updating the stormwater management system from a 50-year to 100-year storm capacity, updating the watershed area calculations in the stormwater report, and the proposed catch basins can be removed “at the discretion at the Town of Newtown.” The last comment from Curtis was about the drainage easements. Carnrick showed the area on the survey map that had already been submitted.

Following a conversation between Carnrick and Curtis, Carnrick removed the first detention pond on the plans and replaced it with stormwater galleries. He also removed a proposed 18-inch pipe connecting the two catch basins, as one report said it was sufficient and the other said that it was “close to capacity.” He replaced it with a different option.

As he discussed the changes to the stormwater system, Carnrick said that more trees would have to be removed from 6 Fleetwood Drive and 79 Farview Drive to accommodate the alternate plan.

“It doesn’t matter to me,” Carnrick said. “At the end of the day, I’ll leave it to the engineer. I’m fine with either plan.” Carnrick submitted his original report and the 132-page HydroCAD report to Curtis.

Steve Maguire, deputy director of Land Use, offered an update as to where the application stood. He explained that the revised documents were submitted the morning of August 6 and Curtis did not have time to review them. He recommended a continuation of the hearing so Curtis could look over the documents.

Alternate Commissioner Don Mitchell explained that this application is for a subdivision, and a lot of the questions and comments discussed right then would be settled through a special exception application. A subdivision just has to prove that three single-family lots can be made at the site.

Commissioner Roy Meadows asked if the water collected by the stormwater management system would flow into the Pootatuck River. Carnrick replied that the outflow from the original proposal would be less than the alternate. Meadows asked if the system could handle a storm like the historic flooding caused by the August 18, 2024 storm.

Carnrick said the new area can contain 24,000 cubic feet of water and that, no matter what, 20 inches of rain would cause the system to fail. For a normal rain storm, which Carnrick said is about 1.3 inches of rain, the system would work just fine.

Public Comment, Carnrick Responds, And Commission Deliberates

Chair David Rosen invited members of the public up to comment. First to speak was Marylou Vayan, a neighbor of the proposed subdivision.

Vayan said that the engineering report was supposed to be done by now so it should be a “non-starter.” She also shared that everything in the area is washing out due to the rain. She said, “His containment unit is not working if it’s washing out Pootatuck Park Road.”

Thomas O’Rourke spoke next. He shared concerns about more trees being removed. He said further removal would be “critical” to his property due to erosion.

“There’s already extensive damage and I can’t afford to have any more,” O’Rourke told the commission.

William Godfry spoke last and said that he was concerned with the amount of fill that has come in and what is in it, especially with the amount of rain Newtown has had recently. He also wondered if it had been tested for heavy metals.

Attorney Peter Olson said he agreed with Mitchell’s comments about the subdivision application. He said the conversations with Curtis could be “deferred to the actual building permit.” Olson said the commission should close the application and vote to approve the application.

Carnrick said that he was not going to bring up the points made by Mitchell. He added that Curtis has shown there is “ample space” on the site and that the detention basins will work.

After a little more explanation, Rosen said that there were two options: vote on the application knowing the engineering report would be addressed when the special exception application is received, or the hearing could be continued. Rosen said he would prefer to wait.

Commissioner Barbara Manville said that she also thought they should wait for the report.

Maguire said Carnrick was correct and that the details can wait for the building permit stage. His concern was that sometimes a subdivision can require road improvements, which can be tricky down the road if it is approved as it stands without the report.

Alternate Commissioner Jill Soderholm said that she thought they should approve it now and figure out the runoff at another time.

Manville asked what Maguire thought, and he suggested to wait. Rosen asked to confirm that if the hearing is continued, Curtis could provide his full report at the next meeting. Maguire replied that the report had arrived to Curtis that morning, but he did not have the time that day to look it over and respond.

Mitchell reiterated his earlier point that if things are changed on the field during the subdivision construction, the engineering report would be invalid. He said the runoff issues have to be resolved in the building permit stage.

Meadows said he likes to see everything complete before making a vote.

Olson requested if the extension is granted that the continuation would be for receiving Curtis’ report only as Carnrick would not be in attendance. Olson would not be able to answer specific engineering questions by himself. The extension was granted with that stipulation.

There was a motion to continue the hearing. It passed with a 3-2 vote. Rosen, Manville, and Meadows voted in favor of the continuation, and Commissioner Peter Schwarz and Mitchell voted against the continuation.

=====

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