Opposition Continues For

23-Unit Condo Complex

By Andrew Gorosko

About 75 people concerned about the prospect of a 23-unit condominium complex being built in Sandy Hook Center attended an April 6 Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) public hearing, with many registering their opposition to the controversial Edona Commons mixed-income project.

Leaders of the opposition to Edona Commons submitted multiple petitions to the P&Z bearing roughly 400 unique signatures of those who oppose the rezoning, which is required for the high-density project, said opponent Morgen McLaughlin of 14 Alberts Hill Road.

Opponents’ objections also involve heavy traffic, school bus safety, emergency access to the site, the historic character of the neighborhood, the removal of trees, and general aesthetics.

Dauti Construction, LLC, headed by Danbury developer Guri Dauti, proposes Edona Commons for a 4.04-acre site at 95-99 Church Hill Road, a steep, rugged property that lies to the west of Dayton Street. Seven of the 23 dwellings would be reserved for moderate-income families. The five-building complex would contain 57 bedrooms and would take 18 months to construct.

The Edona Commons site abuts the 52-acre site of the 189-unit age-restricted Walnut Tree Village condo complex.

Mr Dauti’s P&Z application seeks the creation of a new land use zone, the rezoning of the site, and the approval of a site development plan. The P&Z public hearing on the project is tentatively scheduled to resume on May 18.

Donald Tone, a traffic engineer representing the developer, said that added traffic generated by the complex “will not have a significant impact on local roadways.”

Hydrogeologist Russell Slayback, representing the developer, said the construction of Edona Commons would not damage nearby domestic water wells.

In the public comment portion of the hearing’s presentations, State Representative Julia Wasserman of 113 Walnut Tree Hill Road stressed that during peak traffic periods, it is especially difficult for motorists to make a left turn from Walnut Tree Hill Road onto eastbound Church Hill Road, near the development site. Church Hill Road in Sandy Hook Center has significant traffic problems, she noted.

Lincoln Sander of 211 Walnut Tree Hill Road, who heads the Newtown Historical Society, said Sandy Hook Center is a historic place, adding that he is exploring its possible designation as a historic district. “If this [condo] project is approved, it will be an aesthetic holocaust,” Mr Sander said.

Megan Williams of 82 Church Hill Road said the developer’s goal is to maximize profits by constructing 23 dwellings. By approving such a project, the P&Z would be setting a negative precedent for such growth in the future, she said.

Ms McLaughlin asked whether all proposed 23 condos would be owner-occupied or whether some units would serve as rental properties. She asked about the broader implications of the developer’s proposed Mixed Income Housing District (MIHD) zone, which would be tailored to allow Edona Commons to be built.

Bill Jensen of 171 Jennifer Lane posed a series of questions about the fire safety aspects of the project, including fire vehicle access. “You do need two ways getting in and out of that complex,” he said. The developer has proposed a “boulevard-style” accessway, which would have two lanes separated by a median.

Joseph Borst of 10 Beechwood Drive, who is a Legislative Council member, said, “It’s going to look like a bald mountain with a lot of cliff dwellers up there.”

“I’m opposed…It doesn’t make any sense,” Mr Borst said.

Mary Curran of 41 Cold Spring Road, said “It’s obvious, it should be rejected.”

Mary Ann O’Donnell of 97 Church Hill Road said, “I’m very upset. I’m shaking right now.”

Ms O’Donnell said the project would be built directly behind her house, which she bought about 2½ years ago. “Financially, this is going to wreck me…I don’t think it’s fair,” she said. Having a 23-unit condo complex directly behind her house would damage her property’s value, she said. Ms O’Donnell urged the P&Z to turn down the project.

Julia Nable of 10 Walnut Tree Hill Road compared the appearance of the proposed buildings to “army barracks.” The motive for such construction is profit, she said. Similar past proposals from Mr Dauti were twice rejected by the P&Z, she noted. The P&Z’s approving such a project would indicate a disregard for the public, Ms Nable said.

Zoltan Csillag of 10 Walnut Tree Hill Road said pointedly, “I find this [condo complex] proposal ridiculous…I think that it should be dismissed rapidly.”

Mary Fellows of 120 Walnut Tree Hill Road termed the project, “a ridiculous proposal for an inappropriate area.” The town already contains three trailer parks and four communities along Lake Zoar, which amount to “affordable housing,” she said.

Duane Jones of 16 Walnut Tree Hill Road said the development contains no appropriate place for children to play amid a rocky hillside. He said it is “not an acceptable site for kids.”

Wendy Davenson of 88 Church Hill Road expressed concerns about the potential for stormwater runoff problems emanating from the site.

Attorney Ryan McKain, representing the developer, said he would respond to the public comments in writing.

P&Z View

P&Z Chairman William O’Neil said that the zoning rule changes that the developer proposes in order to create Edona Commons are significant changes.

P&Z member Lilla Dean questioned the developer’s proposal to remove almost 11,000 cubic yards of earthen material from the site.

Mr McKain responded that the project’s design seeks to fit the buildings into the landscape. Mr McKain added, “I’m not going to say these [buildings] are going to be invisible from the road.”

Considering the topography of the site, the complex would be “tough to look at from Church Hill Road,” Mr O’Neil said.

“Nobody’s going to say you’re not going to see this [complex] when you’re driving by,” acknowledged engineer Steve Trinkaus, representing the developer.

Unsatisfied with the level of detail that the developer had provided concerning traffic flow, the Police Commission, acting as the town’s traffic authority, told the developer on April 4 to perform a complete traffic study for the project. The Police Commission is next scheduled to discuss the traffic and emergency-access aspects of Edona Commons on May 2. The Police Commission makes traffic recommendations to the P&Z.

P&Z member Philip Cruz said the developer should provide details on a secondary accessway to the site, an accurate traffic study for the project, geological data, and nighttime illumination specifications.

On April 12, Conservation Commission members conducted a fourth and final public hearing on the developer’s request for a wetlands permit for the condo complex proposal.

Mr Trinkaus responded to a range of environmental issues which the private non-profit environmental group known as Trout Unlimited had raised about the project’s potential adverse effects on trout habitat in the nearby Pootatuck River.

Mr Trinkaus maintains that the project’s design will protect against environmental damage to the river, which passes through Sandy Hook Center.

Town Conservation Official Rob Sibley said that Conservation Commission members, acting as the town’s wetlands  protection agency, will act on the wetlands application at an upcoming session.

The commission has turned down the developer’s aquifer protection application for the project. The developer is expected to reapply.