In recent weeks local officials have heard from realtor Michael Struna about developer interest in the renovation of Cochran House into an apartment complex — interest that may wane as time passes without a positive response from Newtown.

In his letter to First Selectman Pat Llodra and Selectman Will Rodgers, Mr Furrier said housing at Fairfield Hills — a reuse that is not permitted under the current master plan for the development of the campus, “will be a catalyst to bringing apartment building and large housing projects into Newtown for the first time.” While housing is at the moment not among approved reuses for the former state hospitals buildings and grounds, a Master Plan Review Committee is currently reviewing the document.

Mr Furrier fears that housing “holds the potential to radically alter Newtown in potentially disastrous ways.” His memo asserts: “Several town officials, who support housing at Fairfield Hills, have begun promoting only the benefits … while neglecting to highlight drawbacks.”

Housing would “prove to be a slippery slope,” he warned, transforming Newtown into something “less rural and more into a little city.” He stated, “We must consider the likelihood that once housing is permitted into the master plan, all of the buildings could potentially be converted into housing projects.” He speculates, “The permitted use will become precedent … if large apartments become widespread they will lead to population growth, strain resources …” He states, “We must facilitate a public vetting of the pros and cons of housing reuse including a full consideration of all the consequences, and that’s not happening.”

Instead, he said, “Urgent calls from the realtor and some town officials to move on this issue are undermining a fair process of deliberation and public debate.”

The Process

Mr Furrier states in his memo on the housing issue, “So long as Fairfield Hills remains exempt from the … town charter, and so long as all power over Fairfield Hills remains in the hands of the Board of Selectmen, then we must consider the extreme case that we, or future selectmen will approve housing uses that could permanently reconfigure established housing precedent.”

He then returned to an often-expressed complaint: [Town officials] adopted a master plan that voters rejected. Then we established an authority [the Fairfield Hills Authority] that operates outside the town charter. Then we consider a municipal center that was widely opposed … what’s so concerning to me is that the skids seem to be greased to push housing through … while we seem to be truncating public debate.”

He states, “If we allow housing ... there is no doubt in my mind that our ability to hold growth and development in check would be weakened.” He insists that the housing debate “be elevated to a higher level of review … housing needs a great deal more vetting and public debate.”

Responding Monday, Selectman Will Rodgers began, “I know in the past the first selectman and I have been reluctant to speak on housing out of respect for the master plan review process, but in light of the accelerated housing decisions, I agree with [Mr Furrier]. We should look at the downsides.”

 He then explained, “The downside has been considered since the genesis of Fairfield Hills.” The town purchased the property “to prevent development.”

Criticizing the current urgency to consider housing at Cochran House, Mr Rodgers said, “Why is one specific proposal being the tail that wags the dog?” He noted that when the town hired one exclusive realtor to market the campus in past months, “we warned that there is a master plan and it’s under review.” By doing so, Mr Rodgers said, “The Board of Selectmen went on a limb — we’re collecting possibilities so we can consider practicals and hypotheticals.”

He is also disappointed. “I feel private parties interested [in FFH] may have been misled,” he said.

Offering his own position on housing, he said, “It makes no sense in my opinion.”

First Selectman Pat Llodra said, “I have been resistant that the board should weigh in on the housing question.”

She recalled highlighting contentious topics to the Master Plan Review Committee members, including housing. The other lightning rod was the topic of economic development.

“I think it would be a disservice to the review committee to take on a formal discussion and action that would not allow them a fair assessment … until the review committee is done, comments can reflect our points of view, but not the board’s,” she said.

In a phone call following Monday’s meeting, Mr Rodgers addressed both housing and the Fairfield Hills redevelopment process. Part of the problem is doing things “in an nonideal way,” he said. “We consider practical opportunities while revising the plan — not ideal, but it’s what we have to do.”

Regarding housing, he said, “I don’t think anything about the proposal qualifies. We bought Fairfield Hills to prevent housing.” A certain urgency may exist that a likely development deal for Cochran House “will go away — the developer says he wants it, but do we want it?”

He said, “Historically, it seems not.”

As far as the authority’s existence and structure, Mr Rodgers said that between the town and the state, “It was the best decision they could make at the time. It was a judgment call.”

Mr Rodgers also intends to dispel ideas that the authority was created in “a secret, end-run manner.”

During Monday’s meeting, Mr Rodgers had said, “It is not true that by being outside the charter that Fairfield Hills works outside of public process. As far as conspiracy theories, I disagree.”

Mr Furrier had said, “I never suggested that the Fairfield Hills Authority was all-powerful; they’re executor of the plan. I do think that decisions and ultimate power over Fairfield Hills is with the Board of Selectmen.”