Walnut Tree Village Project Draws Three Lawsuits

By Andrew Gorosko

A total of seven plaintiffs have filed three separate lawsuits against the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) and Walnut Tree Developers, Inc., in seeking to block the P&Z’s recent approval of the developer’s  plans to expand Walnut Tree Village from 80 condominium units to 190 units.

In August, the P&Z approved adding 110 units to Walnut Tree Village, an expansion project that was strongly opposed by people living nearby. The complex, which is designed for people over 55, is on Walnut Tree Hill Road in Sandy Hook. Construction of the initial 80 units started in 1995. Walnut Tree Village was the town’s first condo complex.

Plans to expand Walnut Tree Village drew stiff opposition at a June public hearing from neighboring residents. They objected to the project on several counts, and in some cases asked the P&Z to reject the construction proposal from Louis DeFilio and George Trudell, who do business as Walnut Tree Developers. The expansion project is a scaled-down version of a 133-unit expansion proposal that the P&Z had rejected in November 1999. The revised application addresses issues raised by the P&Z in its initial rejection.

The developers plan to build 110 new condos on a rugged 35-acre site on Walnut Tree Hill Road adjacent to the 18-acre site where 80 condos now stand. Unlike the 18-acre site, which is relatively level, the 35-acre site is steep and poses a more complex construction project than did the 18-acre site.

Walnut Tree Developers has started construction of a private road at 14 Walnut Tree Hill Road to provide access to the condo expansion project. A private road at 26 Walnut Tree Hill Road serves the existing 80 condos.

In one of the lawsuits, Michael and Kathleen Nowak of 7 Patriot Ridge Road, and Keith and Mary Ann O’Donnell, also of Patriot Ridge Road, state that in approving the expansion project, the P&Z acted illegally, arbitrarily, and in abuse of its discretion.

The plaintiffs state they are aggrieved by the P&Z’s development approval and will suffer the direct adverse effects of traffic and noise from the development site.

The Nowaks and O’Donnells allege that in approving the condo expansion project, the P&Z failed to enforce the zoning regulations concerning street access to the site. The plaintiffs state that the town engineer had advised the P&Z that the proposed accessway to the site does not meet applicable regulations.

The plaintiffs also allege the P&Z illegally approved the elderly housing units with walkout basements.

The plaintiffs also charge that the project would pose safety hazards stemming from its construction and from the additional local traffic that it will generate.

Also, the plaintiffs claim the presence of an expanded condo complex would substantially hurt property values in the neighborhood.

The plaintiffs further claim that the project is not in harmony with the general character of the neighborhood and would create additional congestion or a traffic hazard on existing streets.

   Also, the plaintiffs allege that in approving the project, the P&Z ignored an agreement between the plaintiffs and the developers which prohibits the construction of condos near the plaintiffs’ property, and prohibits the merger of the 35-acre development site for 110 new condos with the adjacent 18-acre site where the 80 existing condos stand.

Through the lawsuit, the Nowaks and O’Donnells seek to have a judge overturn the P&Z’s granting the developers a special exception to the zoning regulations to build the 110-unit expansion project.    

Access And Safety

In another lawsuit, Duane G. and Linda L. Jones of 16 Walnut Tree Hill Road charge that in approving the expansion project the P&Z acted illegally in that the development site has insufficient street access, adding that the P&Z disregarded the town engineer’s advice in that regard.

The Joneses also state that the one P&Z member who voted against the expansion project said allowing elderly housing units with walkout basements is not the intent of the zoning regulations.

The lawsuit states that in approving the expansion project, the P&Z did not enforce its regulations which require that such development not create health and safety hazards for nearby people, although the P&Z knew that the Joneses have a special needs child to whom the construction project and the additional traffic created by the development would pose a safety hazard.

Also, the Joneses allege the expansion project would: substantially damage nearby property values; would not be in harmony with the general character of the neighborhood; and would create a traffic hazard on existing streets.

Through their lawsuit, the Joneses seek to have the P&Z’s development approval nullified and have the special exception to the zoning regulations for the construction project revoked. The Joneses seek to have a judge order the developers to stop all construction.

Breach Of Promise?

A third lawsuit against the P&Z and the developers filed on behalf of Mary Burnham of 24 Walnut Tree Hill Road states: “Plaintiff Mary E. Burnham is, and at all times pertinent to this complaint has been, a party to a contract agreement whereby, for adequate consideration, Louis DeFilio for himself and his successors and assigns, including defendant Walnut Tree Developers, Inc., promised, (among other things), to limit the total number of condominium units on the subject properties to eighty.”

In effect, Ms Burnham contends that the agreement which she reached with Mr DeFilio limits the developers to the 80 condo units which they have already been built on Walnut Tree Hill Road.

In her lawsuit Ms Burnham alleges the P&Z acted illegally in approving the expansion project because: the record of the case does not support its decision; the reasons stated for the approval are improper and not supported by the record; the P&Z acted outside the scope of its authority in approving the project; the decision is incorrect as a matter of law; and the decision deprived Ms Burnham of a vested, lawful property interest without compensation.

 Through her lawsuit, Ms Burnham seeks to have a judge reverse the P&Z’s decision to approve the expansion project, plus have her legal costs covered.

The P&Z and the developers have October 24, September 26, and October 3, court return dates in the Nowak-O’Donnell, Jones, and Burnham lawsuits, respectively.

 

Opposition

Condo expansion project opponents told P&Z members at a June public hearing that the developers did not have the legal standing to expand the complex. Opponents cautioned that the project would involve blasting, create steep slopes, cause drainage problems, result in poor motorist sight lines, and would worsen existing traffic problems on Walnut Tree Hill Road.

Opponents charged that the site has an insufficient accessway under the zoning regulations. Opponents also charged that the site planned for the expansion project is technically a separate site from the site of the existing 80 condo units, posing legal problems.

Opponents also claimed the expansion project is not in harmony with the general character of the neighborhood. They added that the expansion project would substantially impair nearby property values, create additional traffic hazards on existing streets, and create health and safety hazards.

Walnut Tree Developers countered the various criticisms of its condo project, pointing out that its revised 110-unit condo expansion application addresses and resolves the issues which the P&Z had raised in denying its initial 133-unit condo expansion proposal.

In rejecting the initial 133-unit expansion proposal in November 1999, the P&Z stated the developers proposed too much physical disturbance of the site, involving too much earthen cutting and filling.

In the revised expansion project, the grading is gentler and some proposed buildings have been removed. The revised plan reduces the number of condo units planned for an area near a ridge top.

Following the rejection of the initial condo expansion proposal, the developers had four conferences with town land use officials to determine what would make for an acceptable development plan. P&Z members later approved the 110-unit condo expansion project in a 4-to-1 vote.