Newtown Planning & Zoning Commission had a lot on its plate this year. Several 8-30g applications came through and were either approved or denied, each with its own set of unique challenges and concerns.

Vessel Technologies At 22 Oakview And 4 Berkshire Road

Starting in November of last year, New York-based developer Vessel Technologies put in an application for two buildings comprised of 136 units under Connecticut General Statute 8-30g, or the “affordable housing” statute. Under this statute, developers can go into towns with less than ten percent of affordable housing and propose affordable housing units that do not comply with local zoning regulations nor the plan of conservation and development (POCD). The only reason why 8-30g applications can be denied is for health and safety reasons, and those reasons need to outweigh the need for affordable housing.

This application was first presented in November and was in constant discussion until the vote in February. During the several public hearings, traffic studies were presented, drainage plans were explained extensively, and several debates about parking took place. Some residents even applied for an intervenor status, which was granted. The intervenors retained engineer Steven Trinkaus to present an opposing testimony.

Due to the historic flooding on August 18, 2024, Aquarion well fields have been running at less-than normal capacity, still waiting to have debris cleaned from the collapsed stone culvert belonging to Housatonic Railroad Company, and Aquarion is not issuing any new water hook-ups. On February 20, after almost three months of public hearings and conflicting reports from engineers, P&Z finally hosted a vote.

The application by Vessel Technologies was denied due to the lack of water at the site. The denial narrowly passed on a 3-2 vote, with Chair David Rosen, Secretary Barbara Manville, and alternate David Landau voting in favor of the denial. Commissioner Roy Meadows and Greg Rich both voted in opposition of the denial.

After the denial passed, Vessel then submitted an appeal, a litigation that is still in progress now. Some intervenors from the hearings petitioned the court to be intervenors on the appeal, which was also granted. Right now, Vessel Technologies, Newtown, and the intervenors are still trying to reach a compromise and settle the appeal.

Taunton Woods

Many residents are familiar with the old Taunton Press site located at 63 South Main Street. On April 17, three applications came through Planning & Zoning regarding that site. The first, Application 25.06, was for a text amendment to add a special design district #15; then Application 25.07 for a zone change from special design district #11 to the new design district #15; and Application 25.08 for the building itself.

Application 25.08 read, “to permit the construction of a new residential building with 36 units and to change the use of two existing buildings; one existing building will be residential with 26 units and the other existing building will be mixed use with 15 residential units and commercial/office space. Other uses on the property include storage, outdoor recreational facilities, community gardens, café/restaurant and all associated site work.”

Phil Clark, president of Claris Design Build, a Newtown company at 53 Church Hill Road, was the applicant. He said that Claris has “outgrown” the space they currently have and wanted to stay in Newtown. Clark’s plan was to add a third building to the site for residential use and to build on the garden that already exists on the property.

After a few public hearings, Claris and Candlewood Valley Trout Unlimited, a conservation group for Deep Brook, met and discussed how to preserve Deep Brook to maintain the trout population within.

On June 5, the applications were approved with conditions. The conditions placed on the project were including sidewalks “to the abutting road right of way when pedestrian walkways on RTE 25 become available,” and “A detailed affordable housing plan as outlined and described in the application, will be received and approved by the Newtown Land Use Agency prior to Certificate of Occupancies being issued.”

Then, on October 16, Claris Design Build hosted an official groundbreaking ceremony for members of the public, local officials, and P&Z. The ceremony was a success, and Pootatuck Watershed Association and Candlewood Valley Trout Unlimited both came and talked to attendees about the importance of Deep Brook and the ecological nature of Taunton Press, which will now be known as Taunton Woods — a mixed-use property that will serve as apartments and Claris’ new office space.

Senior Living Residential District At 120 Glen Road

Newtown P&Z heard an application form GRC Construction for property located at 120 Glen Road. This application was for a text amendment for a new zone called “Senior Living Residential District,” and another for a zone change for 120 Glen Road.

Greg Carnrick, owner of GRC Construction, explained that he hopes to put a 21-unit community on five acres of land and use septic technology over sewer.

Over the few public hearings that were heard, several residents raised concerns regarding water and surrounding wells. Many neighbors shared that their wells have had to be hydrofracked and expressed their opposition to the development.

Commissioner Greg Rich shared that he believed this was “spot zoning.” Peter Olson, the attorney representing the applicant, said that “spot zoning is a dead concept.” Commissioner Roy Meadows raised concerns about the site being so close to Lake Zoar and the use of septic systems.

There was a lot of discussion regarding the use of septic systems, as the original language for the application read, “Text Amendment to the Zoning Regulations of the Town of Newtown, to create a zoning district to modify senior living housing. Restricted to people over the age of 55 by removing the sewer connection requirements, lowering the required acreage and increasing the unit density by amending, Article V1, Section 9 titled ‘Senior Living Residential District,’ and to amend Article 1, Section 3 and Chart VII-1.”

Carnrick worked with town departments to create language everyone was comfortable with, including the town sanitarian. The language was expanded to say that if a property is on sewer, sewer must be used.

After much deliberation, the commission finally voted on the proposed text amendment and zone change. The commission, and public in attendance, were all reminded that the applicant would have to come back with a full site plan if these applications were approved.

Ultimately, the text amendment and zone change were approved on July 17 with a 3-2 vote. Commissioners Roy Meadows and Barbara Manville voted against the development, and Connie Widmann, David Rosen, and Greg Rich voted for the development.

Mt Pleasant Road Craze

Several applications for Mt Pleasant Road came before Planning & Zoning this year. Some were denied outright, like the self-storage facility at 176 Mt Pleasant, and some were given a lot more thought and debate.

For example, the proposed 67-unit apartment complex at 128-130 Mt Pleasant Road and 1 Hawleyville Road. Several public hearings were held regarding this application, the first being September 18. Many, many residents in the area came to the public hearings and expressed their opposition to the proposed development. The development planned to use Hillcrest Drive as a back exit/entrance for the complex. Many residents on Hillcrest Drive complained about this potential use, citing safety concerns, property damage, and the narrow nature of the road.

At the November 6 meeting, Attorney Tim Hollister, representing the applicant, told the commission he had gone to Newtown’s Design Advisory Board for input. DAB returned an extensive comment letter, but took some of the suggestions and implemented them into the design, such as using different colors and materials on the outside of the building to make it look like several buildings rather than one big one. Hollister assured everyone that the applicant was “committed to safety,” and told the commission that signage would be included in the site to try and deter people from using Hillcrest and the development as a “cut through” to Route 6 from Hawleyville Road.

The application was ultimately approved on Thursday, December 4 in a 4-1 vote, with Commissioners Connie Widmann, Barbara Manville, Roy Meadows, and Peter Schwarz all voting in favor, and Chair David Rosen voting in opposition. The application was approved with the following conditions: sidewalks from the upper driveway to Route 6, along Route 6, and along Route 25; to create traffic curbing and a traffic island to ensure a right turn only out of the front driveway onto Route 6; a gated entry at the top of Hillcrest into the development, as well as signage on Hillcrest that the road is not a through road; and to work with the Design Advisory Board to keep with the colonial nature of the community to the extent that is possible.

This was not the only application for Mt Pleasant Road, however. On October 16, Attorney Stephen Bellis approached the commission with two applications: Application 25.22 for a text amendment to “create a zoning district to modify the affordable housing language by adding Section 9.1 — 9.12 to the text amendment for affordable housing through developing at a greater density”; and Application 25.23 for a zone change from BPO (business or professional office zone) to the proposed “Mount Pleasant Development District.”

Bellis approached the commission with a conceptual site plan with three buildings rolled out in three phases. The first phase would be a building with 68 units, phase two would be a building with 88 units, and phase three would be a building with 144 units. These three buildings would have 300 units, with over 500 total parking spaces. All of these buildings would have been stilted to provide parking under the buildings, and there would be amenities on the property such as a pool, club house, and gym.

After Bellis’ presentation, the public expressed opposition to this development. Many people raised concerns over sight lines, water capacity, abilities of local volunteer fire companies, and traffic volumes. Bellis allowed the public to speak at the next public hearing first, then offered a rebuttal. After his rebuttal, he asked that the public hearing be closed, which it was.

At the next meeting, December 4, the commission held a vote regarding the conceptual site plan. The two applications for 188-190 Mt Pleasant Road were denied unanimously.

The last application for 90 Mt Pleasant Road is for two athletic fields. This application is still in progress and currently has an intervenor. The hearings will continue at the next meeting, January 15.

=====

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