Developer Seeks Sewer Service For Sandy Hook Condos

By ANDY GOROSKO

Published: Mar 17, 2006 12:00 am

By Andrew Gorosko

Water and Sewer Authority (WSA) members are awaiting technical information from the developer of a 23-unit condominium complex proposed for Sandy Hook Center to determine whether such construction is eligible for a municipal sanitary sewer system connection.

Dauti Construction, LLC, of Danbury proposes the construction of Edona Commons at 95-99 Church Hill Road. The complex would contain five buildings on the steep, rugged 4.04-acre site. Seven of the 23 units would be reserved for moderate-income families. The project would contain a total 57 bedrooms. Construction would last 18 months.

Besides WSA consideration of the condo complex proposal, the matter also is pending before the Police Commission, serving as the townâs traffic authority, and the Conservation Commission, acting as the townâs wetlands protection agency and also as the townâs aquifer protection review agency.

The developerâs main application is pending before the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z). It involves the creation of a new land use zone, the rezoning of the site, the issuance of a site development plan approval, the granting of a special permit, and the issuance of an excavation permit. A P&Z public hearing on the proposal is slated for April 6.

Condo complex opponents met this week to plot their strategy against the development proposal. (see related story)Â

WSA members met on March 9 to review Danbury developer Guri Dautiâs request to connect the proposed condo complex to the municipal sewer system, said Public Works Director Fred Hurley.

The P&Z had forwarded the design plans for Edona Commons to the WSA in seeking WSA membersâ comments on the construction proposal.

WSA members are having the engineers for Mr Dauti analyze the filtrational characteristics of the soils on the site to determine how many dwellings could be served if conventional septic waste disposal systems were to be built there, Mr Hurley said. The WSA uses such information in deciding on requests for sewer connections.

Engineer Steve Trinkaus of Trinkaus Engineering, LLC, of Southbury, represents the developer.

The developer will need to provide the WSA with information concerning the aquifer protection aspects of the Edona Commons proposal, Mr Hurley said. About two-thirds of the site lies within the townâs Aquifer Protection District (APD), an overlay zone above the Pootatuck Aquifer where the P&Z has strict environmental protection requirements in force. The aquifer is the source of two local public water supplies.

Although a portion of the 4.04-acre development site lies within the townâs sewer district, the developer will have to map the siteâs physical relationship to the sewer district for the WSAâs review, Mr Hurley said.

The WSA plans to have the townâs consulting engineers, Fuss and OâNeill, Inc of Manchester, review whether the townâs sewage treatment plant and the Sandy Hook Center sewage pumping station have sufficient capacity to allow the proposed 23-unit condo complex to connect to the municipal sewer system, Mr Hurley said. Fuss and OâNeill designed the town sewer system, which started operation in 1997.

The Edona Commons complex would generate between 5,000 and 7,000 gallons of wastewater daily, Mr Hurley said.

The WSA is preparing a list of the various technical information that the developer must submit to the WSA for its review, he said.

If the developer meets all of the WSAâs various technical requirements for a sewer connection, the WSA may then provide the developer with an âadvisory letter,â Mr Hurley said.

Such an advisory letter would indicate that the WSA would be willing to negotiate with the developer for a municipal sewer connection, provided that the developer receives all necessary approvals for the condo complex from various town agencies, he said.

The Edona Commons site is on the north side of Church Hill Road, west of the intersection of Church Hill Road and Dayton Street. The site abuts the 189-unit age-restricted Walnut Tree Village condominium complex.

It is the third time that Mr Dauti has attempted to develop the site with high-density multifamily housing. Both previous proposals were thwarted by the P&Z, which turned down his requested zoning rule changes.

In a 2003 attempt to develop the site, Mr Dauti sought to build 16 units. In a second failed attempt early in 2004, he sought to build 12 units.

Fire Reports | July 9-15, 2025

Original Student Art Is Expanding The Exhibition Space Of Local Business

Maplewood Hosting Free Summer Concerts

Newtown Middle School Tech Support Specialist Bruce Moulthrop Retires

Police Reports | July 7-July 13, 2025

Reservoir Rd. does indeed appear to have an interesting history that I often ponder as I hike the Rochambeau Trail. Early on it was apparently part of a main route from the center of the Borough to Taunton, which went up Mt. Pleasant Rd. and then roughly followed a watershed boundary from Mount Pleasant to Taunton Hill. When the current switchback road was built from West St. to Castle Hill in the 1800s, replacing the indirect route through the campground that Rochambeau used, the part of that original route to Taunton now known as Reservoir Rd. became redundant. But on an 1868 town map and topographic maps from 1892 and 1915, it looks like both routes were still maintained as roads. By the time of the 1934 aerial survey of CT, the connection to Mount Pleasant Rd. (maybe called Reservoir Rd. by then since the reservoir is visible) even had two outlets onto Castle Hill Rd. Since it is only shown as a partial dashed line on a 1953 topographic map, it may have stopped being maintained as a passable through road by then. But on a 1963 topographic map, where the section down to Knollwood Dr. had become a normal road again, the other end is shown as a dashed-line road, still with two connections to Castle Hill Rd., and a structure on the east side where one can still find remnants of a house today. Maybe a longtime resident can add comments about what it looked like in the 1950s and 1960s?

Clarity on Reservoir Road and the Rochambeau Trail

Please stop referring to your fellow Newtowners as the Mob. I was at the Legislative Council meeting where Mr. Pisani insulted the intelligence of a room full of Newtown voters; twice, and not in a satirical way. Plenty of new projects have been given the green light - the repurposing of the Taunton Press property is a welcome addition to Town, a new retail center is under construction on Church Hill Rd there are ongoing plans for the existing Fairfield Hills campus. Newtown is a wonderful place to live. Kudos to the Town officials who have managed to grow Newtown and maintain a small town feel, which may mean saying no to development more often than you would like. There will always be two sides to any proposal - different points of view are welcome and essential - name calling adds nothing to the conversation.

Who is Calling Newtowners Stupid?

Appreciate your perspective. Rather than litiate all of your opinions expressed here, here....I would like correct your opinion about the BOS having the final authority on road discontinuance decisions. State statute (CT GS 13a-49), requires the BOS' decision to be approvate by a majority vote at a regular or special town meeting (just like the one Newtown had a few years back to decide to spend the money to build an addition onto the High School). In towns that no longer have any town meetings, that responsibility would fall on the town's representaive government, or legislative body....in Newtown's case, our Legislative Council. Failure to follow this statutory process is but one of the reasons the town/the BOS is being sued.

There are many private roads in Newtown where they property owner owns right to the center line, for example this is often true in the lake communities. Many of these roads predate and do not conform to the Town's roads standard and therefore the Town never accepted them into the Town road system. Does the Town actually own this road?

It’s important to clarify the tone and context of Derek Pisani’s remarks, particularly the satirical line about suing Newtown for "Gross Stupidity." This was clearly a tongue-in-cheek jab at the exhausting culture of legal threats that’s become a staple on the local Facebook Group forums. It was a reflection of frustration over endless regulatory hurdles and obstructionism, and the desire to avoid common sense solutions not an insult aimed at residents. Satire, is meant to provoke thought and highlight the absurdities. If we are unable to distinguish between satire and literal threats, perhaps the comment hit closer to the truth than we’d like to admit. Rather than focusing on Pisanis style, we should be discussing the substance of what he’s pointing out: that Newtown’s progress is being routinely blocked by a small but vocal contingent who seem intent on saying “no” at every turn. They are saying no to any development, no to common sense solutions to crowd control, etc. Newtown deserves leaders who are willing to call things as they see them, even if their language ruffles feathers. That doesn’t mean they lack respect for constituents—it means they care enough to challenge the Mob and push for solutions. Isn't that what we elect people to do? I applaud Pisani's dedication, he certainly has earned my vote. Regardless, let’s not reduce conversation to tone-policing and outrage. Let’s focus on the issues that matter.

<< Jul 2025 >>
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
29	30	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31	1	2

Log In

Developer Seeks Sewer Service For Sandy Hook Condos

Leave a Reply Cancel reply