To The Editor:

At last week’s Borough Zoning Commission meeting, I presented images that simulate how the Castle Hill Village is likely to appear from town. Also shown was some of the detailed evidence used to generate those images. The developer disagreed with this analysis. He then repeated his previous assertion — none of the houses will be visible from Main Street. (Note that the project was originally named “Castle View Village”A. See Bee 3/31/2023)

After the meeting, I conferred with a civil engineer who said the definitive way to either prove or disprove the visibility of new construction is to do a “balloon test”. A brightly colored balloon is raised to the top of the planned building and visibility is assessed. Conceptually, it’s very simple. I considered arranging for a formal balloon test to be done by an engineering firm, but was discouraged by the fact that the public hearing has been closed and the Commission is no longer permitted to consider new evidence. However, there is actually existing evidence that the Commissioners might have noticed when they inspected the property. This morning, when driving by the flagpole, I realized that a balloon study is effectively already in place: consider the Gretsch chimney as the balloon.

One may never have noticed the chimney. It’s subtle. The chimney is camouflaged by surrounding trees. When viewed from downhill, the profile of the chimney is from the narrow side. Once you find the chimney, you’ll notice you can see it from nearly anywhere Castle Hill is visible. If you look to the left of the chimney, it’s apparent that line of trees is too thin to disguise anything behind them. To the right of the chimney, the vegetation is quite dense and the number of visible houses will be determined by the number of trees removed. I am convinced that most, or all, of the 26 houses in the front row will be plainly visible, since the row of houses will be arrayed along the ridgeline at the top of a steep slope. Mr Trudell would disagree with me. If he is correct, he could easily prove his point with a formal balloon test. Doing so would assuage some of the serious concerns that many of us have raised.

Mr Trudell’s engineer was certainly aware that a balloon test could quickly resolve the issue. Yet he sat silently during many hours of public hearings while multiple townspeople expressed legitimate concerns about the appearance of this development. The most likely reason for his silence is inescapable.

There are at least five citations in the Borough’s Zoning Regulations that clearly state views must be preserved. Two of the citations specifically mention the Castle Hill view.

The Commission must reject this application, not just because a large number of concerned citizens don’t like it, but because the development would violate multiple stipulations contained within the Regulations, including stipulations to preserve views.

Eric Thompson

Newtown