On Thursday, February 13, the Planning & Zoning Commission held a special meeting after the February 6 meeting was snowed out. The commissioners discussed once more the proposed development at 22 Oakview Drive and 4 Berkshire Road.

The original plans detailed two apartment buildings with two access drives, one on Oakview Road and the other on Berkshire Road. After hearing from the public, the developer, Vessel Technologies, decided to make one access drive on Berkshire Road with an internal drive connecting the two buildings.

The two apartment buildings will consist of 114 one-bedroom, 6 two-bedroom, and 16 three-bedroom apartments. The buildings would be equipped with smart home technology, such as in-home speakers, air monitoring and purification systems, and the bathrooms can be sterilized using UVC light.

The buildings are “set-aside” developments under Connecticut general statutes 8-30g, or affordable housing. The developer plans to set aside 30% of the apartments, or 41 units, for 40 years at 60-80% of the median income.

Since the proposal in November, the commission has heard concerns regarding parking, traffic, and environmental safety concerns. The applicant listened to all concerns and worked to accommodate as many public comments as possible. At the December 5 meeting, John O’Malley, a resident of Watkins Drive, brought an intervenor to the meeting, Steve Trinkaus.

Trinkaus Addresses The Commission First

At the February 13 meeting, Trinkaus spoke first due to time constraints. His biggest concern was Aquarion not supplying a will-serve letter following the August 18 flood last year that put Aquarion’s well field out of commission.

Trinkaus said to the commission, “Right now, Aquarion cannot do will-serve letters, so you have a potential project in front of you with no public water … The applicant has considered, if you were to bless this project, as a condition of approval, they would not start construction of the buildings until they have a will-serve letter.”

Trinkaus continued, “That’s a little open-ended, in my professional opinion, because if the commission goes that way … the applicant could still remove the houses, clear-cut all the trees on the site and leave it until they get a will-serve letter.”

He added, “If the commission goes that way, there should be no work done on the site at all until the will-serve letter comes into play … you should not approve a project without public water or public sewer.”

O’Malley spoke after Trinkaus. He shared similar concerns as Commissioner Roy Meadows regarding parking. O’Malley’s concerns were about electric vehicle (EV) parking and how many spaces that might take away from the overall parking lot, which has been a major point of concern.

The developer originally had 168 parking spaces, but as the commissioners pushed for more parking, the developer increased the number to 197 spaces. Commissioner Roy Meadows believed that a number closer to 250 parking spaces would be more accurate. Meadows asked several times where people will park if there are not enough spaces.

O’Malley said, “Last meeting we had someone from the commission, I believe his name is Roy … asked the developer what happens when there’s excess cars for parking spaces?” He added, “When there isn’t enough room, people go to the street ... I think this is a public safety issue.”

O’Malley concluded his statements by saying, “I would urge you folks to disallow this development … I think somebody from Newtown ought to reach out to the developer, and with all the space we have in Newtown, find them a place to put this. I’m not against putting this kind of development in, this is just not the place to do it.”

The Applicant Speaks

Meaghan Miles, an attorney at Carmody Torrance Sandak & Hennessey LLP, spoke on behalf of the developer. She said that there were some “outstanding, discreet issues” that kept the public hearing open from the last meeting, one of those issues being the aquifer impact report.

The report was submitted by Thomas Cusack, a hydrogeologist. Miles shared, “He does find at the end that it is his professional opinion that the proposed development meets the letter and intent of the Newtown Aquifer Protection District. The proposed project will have no significant direct or indirect effects, both short-term and long-term on the environment and regional aquifer.”

Miles responded to Trinkaus’ comment regarding the will-serve letter, explaining that Luke Morrow, an engineer from Solli Engineering, has had correspondence with Aquarion. She added that, “We are very open to whatever the language the commission would be comfortable with under these circumstances.”

Following Miles’ comments, Morrow spoke briefly. He discussed storm water run-off for a 100-year storm, such as what the town saw last August. He reminded the audience that the parcel of land Vessel plans to develop is .04% of the entire Pootatuck watershed, and the developer is open to using salt only for wintertime snow management to lessen the possible impact on the watershed.

Morrow also shared that a third-party review determined there is adequate parking on site and there wouldn’t be a serious impact on traffic, and that “the state mandates that you run conduit to at least 10% of your total parking spaces” for EVs. He added that the state wants that technology there for the future, as well as sizing electrical panels to handle any draw from those EVs.

Public Comment

Charles Zukowski, a Newtown resident and chair of the Bike & Trail Committee, was first to speak. He asked the commission and developer to think about the addition of sidewalks.

Zukowski said, “I was hoping sidewalks would be a part of this,” and he added that there was no way for residents of these buildings to access the Oakview Trail. He said, “I wanted to request if for some reason the sidewalks can’t be provided … that at least the landscaping along Oakview be done in a way that sidewalks could be added later by the town.”

Robert Payne, a resident of Berkshire Road, was next to speak. His concerns regarded the consumption of water and the threats it poses to the water quality down the line. He shared, “It is the purpose of this commission to protect our natural resources, not push them to their limits or beyond.”

Payne shared he is also concerned regarding public safety due to traffic and possible strain on emergency services. He said, “It is your duty to concern yourself with the public safety of us now, not the potential safety of future residents later.”

Payne’s wife, Bruna, shared she has seen a lot of car accidents from her home and worries about the additional traffic these buildings will add to Berkshire. She shared that she watches kids walk from the high school along Berkshire and is concerned about their safety.

Ned Simpson, a resident of Watkins Drive, shared he was “pleased” to see that the developers recognized the “absurdity of using Oakview for access and the construction access.” He also added that the ITE manual is “not research, it’s not vetted, it’s not analyzed, it’s just averages.” He is concerned that there is not enough transportation in town and therefore the averages do not consider this aspect. He shared that there should be more parking as a result.

Katherine Simpson, a resident of Watkins Drive, added, “It’s a very odd match,” referring to the three-story proposed buildings in a town where the only three-story building is the high school. She added, “If you can swing this a little wider, you know that the problem is that Newtown does not have a proactive plan for developing housing of all types. And a lot of us in this room are very much in favor of having a plan and would like to work with you on that.”

Charles Patridge, a resident of Watkins Drive, shared that he doesn’t think this development should be approved until the commission knows for sure that there is sufficient water.

Applicant And Commission Respond

Miles reiterated that this project is parking compliant. She also shared that unfortunately, there would be no way to create an American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant entrance to the trail for Oakview Road. She explained that the team explored this, but there would have to be steps for access.

Miles explained to the audience that the developers and landscapers will grade the area along Oakview Road for possible sidewalk additions, but there are connection issues under the overpass of I-84.

Miles said, “When you build a sidewalk, people are going to use it. So, when they’re walking on the sidewalk, are you creating safe connections … to points nearby?”

Miles also shared that this project is not going to attract families, as 114 units are one-bedroom units, so easy access to play areas is not a major area of concern. She explained that the demographic that will be coming are young professionals and older residents that no longer want “the responsibility of a home.”

Commissioner Greg Rich asked Miles two questions: if the applicant would not begin any construction, including land-clearing, until the will-serve letter is issued, and if the applicant would consider adding EV charging stations at this time. Miles answered yes to both.

Meadows asked Morrow about storm drainage, and Morrow showed how the water would flow to the I-84 drainage system.

Following this discussion, David Rosen, the Planning & Zoning Chair moved to close the public hearing. The commission will hold the vote regarding the Vessel Technologies development tonight at the Community Center, 7 pm.

=====

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