Developer Seeks 14-House Development Near Taunton Pond

By Andrew Gorosko

Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) members are considering a developer’s proposal to create a 14-lot residential resubdivision on a 30-acre site off Mt Pleasant Road, where two of the building lots would have shore frontage on Taunton Pond.

Applicants David and Carol French of 149 Boggs Hill Road, doing business as Hunter Ridge, LLC, propose Rochambeau Woods for Mt Pleasant Road. The site is on the south side of Mt Pleasant Road, lying just west of the Taunton Lake Drive neighborhood.

The site received a subdivision approval for four building lots from the P&Z in 1970, but was never developed. The proposal pending before the P&Z, which is a “resubdivision,” would reconfigure the previous subdivision, more than tripling the number of building lots.

The development site is in the borough, but because the borough has no planning agency, the P&Z reviews such applications. The site has R-1 zoning, which requires minimum one-acre lot sizes. 

In early 2001, Ginsburg Development Corporation Connecticut, LLC, had proposed building 110 condominiums for people over age 55 at the Mt Pleasant Road site.

But in May 2001, citing strong neighborhood opposition to its condo construction proposal, plus questions about the availability of municipal sewer service, Ginsburg dropped its proposal to build there. Ginsburg is currently constructing a 96-unit age-restricted condo complex several miles to the west on a 40-acre site at 178 Mt Pleasant Road in Hawleyville, known as Liberty at Newtown.

The P&Z conducted a public hearing on the Rochambeau Woods proposal on May 19.

P&Z Vice Chairman Sten Wilson, serving as acting chairman in the absence of William O’Neil, said police will review the motorist sight line aspects of the developer’s proposal to create a new road. Dakota Drive, a proposed 1,400-foot-long dead-end road, would extend southward onto the site from Mt Pleasant Road.

At issue is the sufficiency of the motorist sight lines looking westward on Mt Pleasant Road for drivers who are exiting the proposed Dakota Drive.

Engineer Larry Edwards, representing the developer, told P&Z members the project would be served by the United Water public water supply system, and also would have fire hydrant service. Each house would have an individual septic waste disposal system, he said.

The site is located near properties that are served by the central municipal sewer system, but is not within the central sewer district.

Open Space

The developer does not propose donating any open space land for passive recreation because the application involves a “resubdivision” of a previous “subdivision,” and thus such a land donation is not required, Mr Edwards told P&Z members.

In 1970, the P&Z had an opportunity to have open space designated at the site, but the commission did not exercise that option, Mr Edwards said. Consequently, the current development proposal is not required to include an open space donation, he said.

In reviewing the development application, the town’s Open Space Task Force found that no open space had been donated as part of the 1970 subdivision, so it has recommended that the developer donate a proposed 3.2-acre building lot with frontage on Taunton Pond as open space land.

The other proposed building lot with pond frontage is 1.9 acres. Both of those proposed lots are “rear lots,” which would have driveways extending to them from the turnaround circle at the end of Dakota Drive.

A developer typically donates open space land to the town or to a private land trust. The P&Z requires subdividers to donate at least 15 percent of the land area in a subdivision as open space, or to provide a fee in lieu of open space to the town.

Acknowledging that there are different views on whether open space should be required in the Rochambeau Woods project, Mr Edwards said he will submit a legal opinion on the matter to the P&Z.

Mr Edwards said development plans for the site are intended to minimize the amount of tree cutting that would occur on the wooded property to maintain its natural qualities.

The project has secured a wetlands permit from the Conservation Commission, serving as the town’s wetlands agency. That permit was granted in July 2002 and contains many restrictions on how the site can be developed. A stormwater control basin would be located near Dakota Drive’s turnaround circle to regulate the stormwater drainage flow into Taunton Pond.

The Conservation Commission reviewed the project in terms of road construction; the proximity of wetlands to houses and septic systems; and the discharge of stormwater into a wetland.

Mr Edwards told P&Z members that a prime issue for the development project concerns the intersection of the proposed Dakota Drive with Mt Pleasant Road. The project has been submitted to the state Department of Transportation (DOT) for review, he said. Mt Pleasant Road in that area also is Route 25 and Route 6. Route 25 is a state road; Route 6 is a federal road.

Mr Edwards noted that residents living on the north side of Mt Pleasant Road have expressed concerns about the nuisance of having vehicle headlamps shining at their houses as those vehicles exit Dakota Drive.

Consequently, Mr Edwards presented P&Z members with three different locations where Dakota Drive could intersect with Mt Pleasant Road. Those three versions of Dakota Drive take into account the issues of: motorist sight lines, the headlamp nuisance, and the proximity of Dakota Drive to a nearby pond, which is a regulated wetland, he said.

Mr Wilson pointed out that the P&Z wants only one road plan to consider in deciding on the development application, not three plans. Mr Edwards responded that his original design would thus be in effect.

Public Comment

Patricia Laurans of 54 Mt Pleasant Road said motorists in that area have difficult sight lines when looking westward on Mt Pleasant Road. The presence of a new road extending from Mt Pleasant Road could pose additional safety hazards in the area, she said. Ms Laurans urged that the new road not be located in a place that would worsen the situation.

Michelle Hankin of 48 Mt Pleasant Road said the headlamps of vehicles exiting the proposed new road should not be allowed to shine onto her house. The new road should be located in a place to prevent that from happening, she said.

The motorist sight lines looking westward on Mt Pleasant Road for drivers who are exiting the proposed Dakota Drive seem to be short sight lines, she said.

Ms Hankin asked whether blasting would be necessary to build Rochambeau Woods.

Mr Edwards responded that some blasting would be required along Dakota Drive. The third of that road which is the farthest away from Mt Pleasant Road is the area where blasting would be needed, he said.

In response to a P&Z query on why the development application had not been submitted to the town for a “preapplication review,” Mr Edwards responded that the application was submitted for such a review in 2002. During such reviews, developers and land use officials discuss the development potential of a given piece of property before a formal application is submitted.

P&Z member Lilla Dean said that although the P&Z did not require open space when the original Rochambeau Woods was approved in 1970, the agency is now interested in such an open space donation. Ms Dean said the town has a “15 percent interest” in the property.

Mr Edwards responded that the developer will provide a legal opinion explaining why no open space donation is required.

Police Commission members are expected to discuss the motorist sight lines issue at their June 7 session, after which they would make a recommendation to the P&Z. The Police Commission serves as the local traffic authority.

The public hearing on Rochambeau Woods is slated to resume at an upcoming P&Z session.