On Thursday, January 16, the Planning & Zoning Commission hosted another public hearing regarding the proposed development at 22 Oakview Road and 4 Berkshire Road.

The development is a multifamily housing unit comprised of 136 apartments between two buildings. In the original plans, there would be two access drives, one on Oakview and the other on Berkshire. After hearing public opposition, the developers revised the plans to include one access drive off Berkshire Road with an internal driveway that connects the two buildings.

Parking & Traffic

The developers added more parking, a request from the commission, for a total of 197 parking spaces.

Luke Morrow, a senior project manager at Solli Engineering, told the commission that the number of parking spaces is more than adequate according to the ITE parking demand data. He added, “Vessel has its own requirement of 1.1 spaces per unit, and it also is in line with the peer review.”

Morrow also mentioned traffic, as this was another area of huge contention for the public. He shared, “We did provide just some additional calculations to show that the proposed site driveway on Berkshire Road … would operate at acceptable levels of service of B or C during all the peak hours evaluated, along with the intersection of Oakview Road and Berkshire Road.”

Meaghan Miles, a land use attorney with Carmody Law, shared with the crowd, “I wanna stress that the DOT major traffic generator certificate and the DOT encroachment permit do not happen until after local zoning approval, so we can’t get that at this time. [The Office of the State Traffic Administration (OSTA)] is not gonna issue their certificate until local zoning approval [is] complete.”

P&Z Alternate Don Mitchell asked about the level of scrutiny the access drive on Berkshire Road will go through. Morrow answered that due to the proposal being over 100 residential units and the buildings being greater than 100,000 square feet, the proposal will undergo full scrutiny from OSTA.

P&Z Commissioner Roy Meadows asked about parking reserves and where guests and potential workers might park in the development. Miles answered most residents would leave during the day, thus opening the parking lots for day workers to park.

The Intervenor And Aquifer Worries

Steven Trinkaus, a licensed professional engineer, was brought in as an intervenor for this development at the last public hearing in December. He shared some concerns regarding the proposed development being in an aquifer protection zone.

Trinkaus said, “In this current letter I actually put the images of the aquifer protection zone and the recharge zones. Your zoning regulations, which I’ve dealt with when I’ve done work in this area of town, require an aquifer report when you’re in that zone … it comes to this commission and then gets referred to wetlands, no report has been submitted for that. And whether it’s 8-30g or not, that report is a required report. 8-30g allows the applicant to, you know, mess around with the zoning, but not that standard. The application remains, in my opinion … incomplete.”

He added, “We need to do better, be better stewards of the environment, and that is by reducing the non-point source pollutant loads that we’re discharging into the environment. These pollutants do not have a huge negative effect on day one. They are cumulative impacts. And by the time you see, say a pond turning green from phosphorous loading, it’s really hard to fix.”

Trinkaus ended his report by mentioning the historic flooding on August 18 and a moratorium that has been put in place for Newtown and Bethel’s public water supply.

“[Aquarion is] not even gonna start a permit process to try and correct that until July of this year, and right now, with a moratorium, you don’t have public water to this site … that’s a public health issue if you don’t have water,” he said.

Some residents shared their concerns regarding the aquifer protection area. Ben Viola raised issues with the stormwater collection systems and the impact to the existing pond on the site.

Randy Walker, president of Pootatuck Water Shed Association, said he is worried about the Pootatuck River and its underlying aquifer.

Kevin Solli, a licensed professional engineer, said in response to the public and Trinkaus’ concerns, “There was a geotechnical report prepared for this property. It was submitted as part of the application. Some of [Trinkaus’] comments seemed to believe that we didn’t have geotech, we weren’t aware of the underlying subsurface conditions. We are. We have done test pits. We’ve done some percolation tests. We feel comfortable that the exfiltration rate that we’re using for our design is consistent with the 2024 stormwater quality manual and we do meet those requirements.”

Miles added to this discussion, saying, “The site right now is connected to public water. The testimony was correct that Aquarion’s not issuing any letters right now until they complete this work that they’re undergoing, the upgrades to the line.”

She added “there are likely no impacts to the aquifer” because the development does not include underground work like for a well and that the stormwater system is designed to meet the Connecticut standards reflected in the 2024 stormwater management manual.

Fire & Safety Concerns

Joe Versteeg, an independent consultant from Torrington, was brought in for a compliance code review.

He shared his report with the crowd saying, “I have reviewed the architectural floor plans and building elevations, as well as the site plans as presented by Solli Engineering this evening, for compliance with the Connecticut State Building Code, Connecticut Fire Safety Code, and the Connecticut Fire Prevention Code. In my review, I found determined compliance with all of those three regulations, and it’s my professional opinion that this project will not pose an adverse impact from health, welfare, and safety with regards to those three Connecticut regulatory documents.”

Despite Versteeg’s determined compliance, members of the public raised more concerns.

Ron Bossio indicated worry regarding a firetruck’s ability to maneuver the property and access drives.

Aaron Nezvesky, a member of two fire departments and Newtown Volunteer Ambulance Corps, said, “We have three ladder trucks, our tallest ladder truck is 105 feet … that’s 105 feet going straight up. When you’re operating at a structure fire, having the potential need to have the apparatus on scene, you’re not parking two feet from the building … you’re parking a safe distance away so you can operate safely if the building’s on fire … you start losing significant height. Four stories is something to, you know, consider.”

Nezvesky added Newtown Volunteer Ambulance is operating at capacity.

“We’re pushing the limit. It’s an all-volunteer service … The ambulance garage might be right up the road, but we’re going to Southbury for mutual aid assistance. We’re having to call on Bethel and Southbury and Danbury for mutual aid assistance., he noted.

Solli addressed those concerns saying, “I just wanted to point out that the fire marshal has reviewed and provided a letter for the commission dated January 10th, which says that they do not have any concerns over fire safety or the ability to protect against issues here.”

Other Public Comment

Ned Simpson again pointed out the issues with pedestrian safety.

“This property is isolated," he said. "You might have a renter who doesn’t have a car. Well, if you don’t have a car in Newtown, you’re dead. There is no place to walk. There is no Uber, there is no Lyft, there is no public transportation. There is no bicycle route … If they want some fresh air, they’re gonna walk on Oakview, and that in itself is very unsafe.”

Mary Ann Jacob also expressed concern for pedestrian safety, specifically high school kids walking to and from the field or high school.

Jacob closed her letter that was read into the record with, “These four-story, metal square buildings do not belong in our village. The proposal takes advantage of 8-30g in the most egregious way, and we cannot allow our town to bend to the greed that is at the root of the proposal.”

Public opposition remains strong, and Town Engineer John Curtis has yet to comment on the new revisions.

The public hearing will continue Thursday, February 6, at 7 pm, at Newtown Municipal Center.

=====

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