On Thursday, September 18, Newtown Planning & Zoning held a regular meeting to discuss application 25.21 by Cela Builders LLC. This proposal is for a “Site Development Plan, located at 128-130 Mount Pleasant Road & 1 Hawleyville Road, for the construction of a 67-unit rental development community with 21 units ‘set-aside’ in compliance with Connecticut General Statutes 8-30g.” The title of the development is Kelmendi Apartments.

Tim Hollister, attorney with Hinckley, Allen & Snyder in Hartford, first addressed the commission after the application was read into the record.

Hollister began by explaining, “When we do an 8-30g application, we prepare what’s called an Affordable Housing Needs memo … basically that is a compilation of some Newtown specific materials, some regional, statewide, and even nationwide, all intended to characterize the need for more lower cost housing in Newtown and the surrounding region.”

Hollister explained he and his team went through a wetland process due to a small amount of wetlands south of Mt Pleasant Road. He said that the site plan being shown does not have a direct impact, but a small part of the driveway and proposed drainage fall within that area.

Hollister then explained 8-30g applications a bit: “The 8-30g standard is that if the proposed development preserves at least 30% of units for at least 40 years for households earning 80 or 60% of the state or area median income, then if the commission were to deny the application and we would appeal to the court, then the proof would rest with the commission to show that it had received evidence at the hearing that the development plan will cause a substantial public health or safety concern … that clearly outweighs the town’s … need for additional lower cost units and that the health and safety concern cannot be addressed by reasonable changes to the site plan.”

He also pointed out that one of the “obligations” for Newtown is to impose conditions of approval to address concerns rather than deny the application. The application, which is proposed at 128-130 Mt Pleasant Road and 1 Hawleyville Road, is for 67 units, including 51 one-bedroom apartments and 16 two-bedroom apartments. Only 21 units will be considered “affordable.” Hollister explained that all units will be identical in terms of amenities, finishes, and quality. The parcel of land is a combined three lots, which total 2.55 acres in a general business B-2 zone.

Hollister shared some reasons as to why he and his team think this an appropriate site for multifamily residential use. He cited there are recreational opportunities nearby, like the hiking trails, supporting infrastructure from Aquarion, and proximity to I-84. He then turned the mic over to Joseph Allen from ARC Home Designs & Remodeling, LLC.

Allen said, “I think what Mr Cela is trying to do here is put together a property that is beautiful, pleasing to look at, efficient, and something to have pride in if you live there.” He then discussed the specifics a bit.

Allen said there would be no wood at all to promote sustainability and keep upkeep low by not having to replace shingles on a roof or rotted siding. Inside the complex will be a gym, office area, lounge, and mail room. The building will stand 36 feet tall on one side and 49.5 feet on the other. After Allen wrapped his presentation, Mike Mazzucco, a civil engineer from Danbury, shared his portion of the presentation.

Mazzucco shared details about the driveway, grading, possible retaining wall along Hawleyville Road, and sidewalks within the property. He also shared that the state Department of Transportation requested a “no left turn” sign in the driveway due to the signaled intersection. The site plans to use sewer connections over septic systems.

Kermit Hua then spoke. Hua is the traffic engineer for this application. He said one existing issue with traffic is the left turn off from southbound Route 25 to head eastbound on Route 6 as that is already at a level F service. Hua expects 25 trips to be generated in the morning peak hour and 26 trips in the afternoon. Hua also shared that the other intersection that will be impacted is Covered Bridge Road and Route 25. The proposal will take that intersection from a D level to E level during morning peak hour.

“It is my professional opinion [that] this is not a safety concern … You have to wait a bit longer to get out of the Covered Bridge Road intersection because it’s stop controlled,” Hua told the commission.

Joseph Versteeg then addressed the commission about building and fire safety. He explained that the building is compliant with all fire and safety codes set forth by the state and believe this proposal will not have “an adverse impact on a substantial public interest, nor does it pose any safety concerns.”

The presentation concluded after that. Chair David Rosen then asked the commissioners if they had any questions.

Commissioners’ Questions

Commissioner Greg Rich first asked about the lighting plan and if the lights would be dark sky complaint. Hollister responded that dark sky compliant lighting is the “intention” of the team. Rich asked about EV charging stations, Hollister replied yes. Rich then asked if the landscaping will be 100% native plants. Once more, Hollister replied yes.

Commissioner Barbara Manville wanted to confirm a back driveway out of the development onto Hillcrest Drive. Hollister explained yes, there will be, and part of the reason for that is the left turn restriction from state DOT leaving the front of the complex.

Commissioner Connie Widmann wanted to know if there would be more than one building. Hollister said there will only be one building and there would not be more buildings in the future.

Commissioner David Landau wanted to know about the volumes of people turning left into the complex from Mt Pleasant Road. Hua replied, “We don’t see an issue.”

Rosen raised a few concerns about the grading and driveway during the winter. Mazzucco responded, “It is a steep driveway, and we are making some modifications to the entrance, as well as the parking areas. We’re trying to flatten them out with the retaining walls and some grading so it’s not as steep. We did eliminate, I think, a couple, maybe two or three spaces, when you came up the driveway … they weren’t really practical.”

Rosen then requested that there be a bit more vegetation near the street to make the development “a little more subtle.” He then asked if the percentage of nonpermeable surface is changing with this new development. Mazzucco said he would get that information for Rosen.

Widmann shared that she agreed with Rosen strongly, “We live in a rural community and the images, while they may be beautiful, represent to me a city dwelling versus a country dwelling. So, it would be a major change to our community to have something that dramatic on that corner with the stone walls and towering buildings when we live in … an extremely rural community, and I just would hope that you would take a little more of that into consideration.”

Rosen then opened the floor to public comment.

Public Comment

Charles Zukowski was first to speak. He shared concerns about the sidewalks. He would like the applicant to make it easy for the residents at this complex to access the Henry Pond Brook Preserve hiking trails. He expressed worries about pedestrians in that area moving safely around that intersection.

Janet McKeown stated that she does feel as though this development poses a health and safety risk to the community because “it’s already a health and safety concern.” She said that she can see Route 25 from her house and the traffic that backs up on the road. She added that people already drive very fast up and down Hillcrest Drive because people do not “read the freaking sign that says it’s not a through road.”

Terry Sagedy then spoke. He agreed with other speakers regarding traffic concerns, “F means failure, so if we’re at F already, I would say that we got a big problem. But my bigger question tonight is I’m not sure why there wasn’t a public hearing with the [Inland Wetlands Commission] on this.” He shared that he never knew there were trails related to Pond Brook, but he is worried about wastewater flowing into Pond Brook.

“Seems to me that body of water could be threatened,” Sagedy said. Steve Maguire, deputy director of land use, offered a point of clarification for Sagedy. Maguire explained a wetland permit was issued for this development in April.

Julietta England raised concerns about families who may live in this complex and how buses would pick up and drop off children.

Heidi Winslow shared a few concerns about the right of way and volume of traffic. She thinks the front driveway should be an entrance only. She also believes this parcel is not big enough for setbacks. Winslow also provided accident reports for that intersection, which were about 30-some car crashes in three years. Additionally, Winslow asked that the drainage plan be more precise.

Josh Reef shared that traffic in the area is already bad because people use Hawleyville Road to get around traffic on I-84 all the time. He also shared that buses are overcrowded and the routes take a long time. He requested that a “better traffic study on a Friday afternoon” be done.

Winslow then spoke again and shared that she is concerned about snow removal and storage and how it will be treated.

Hollister then addressed the commission. He said that the commission would “get a better response if we digest it” and will submit a supplemental memo that addresses the public’s concerns.

Mitchell then shared, “I’ve heard a lot about traffic congestion and increase in traffic, in fact, I try to avoid that area if I can, but we can’t consider congestion. It’s only safety.” The commissioners then briefly discussed traffic impacts and what this development could contribute to that, taking note of the gas station that is currently being built in the area which will add more congestion.

After this brief discussion, Rosen extended the public hearing to Thursday, October 16, 7 pm, Newtown Municipal Center, 3 Primrose Street.

=====

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