By James Lomuscio
Developers of a planned four-story, 94-unit rental property at 1177 Post Road East are willing to adjust their site plan, hopefully to the town’s satisfaction, without using the state’s affordable housing statute 8-30g to override zoning laws, their attorney said.
An architect’s rendering of the proposed project at 1177 Post Road East. (CLICK TO ENLARGE) Contributed photo
Still, 1177 PRE Associates LLC is keeping 8-30g in its quiver via proposed text amendment 714. The amendment adds a new section “Residential-Rental Housing Opportunity/Workforce Zone District” as provided by the state’s affordable housing appeals procedure.
Under state law, 8-30g can be enforced if a town does not have 10 percent of its housing stock deemed affordable, which Westport does not. That opens the door to an aggressive developer riding roughshod over zoning regulations, doing what he or she pleases, something town officials say would jeopardize Westport’s identity and charm.
Christopher Smith, an attorney from the Shipman & Goodwin LLP firm representing 1177 PRE Associates, cautioned the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) of that during a public hearing Thursday night.
However, upon learning that the P&Z was more amenable to the site plan than the text amendment, he added, “We will be very happy to work with you.”
Smith had come before the P&Z with a trifecta of items: text amendment 714; amendment 715, a map amendment rezoning the 1.96-acre property from general business district (GBD) to residential-rental housing opportunity/workforce (R-RHOW) zone with 30 percent of the units affordable; and the site plan.
The development company is a joint venture of local real estate developers Phil Craft and Stephen Lawrence. They said that 30 percent of the studio, one-bedroom and two-bedroom units would be listed as affordable. This is the third 8-30g project in the works for Westport.
“We could conceivably approve a site plan but not a text amendment or map plan,” said P&Z member Jack Whittle.
P&Z Chairwoman Catherine Walsh gingerly addressed the topic of 8-30g that had come before the commission.
“Sometimes the applicant comes with the wrong vehicle,” she said.
P&Z member and former chairman Chip Stephens was more outspoken.
“This could be acceptable,” he said about the site plan. “My problems is, this is acceptable with some modifications; the text amendment is not. …There’s no requirement that we pass the text amendment.”
One reason the P&Z seemed resigned to certain aspects of the site plan is that it would buy moratorium points via more affordable housing units in the works—and time against facing the heavy hand of 8-30g.
Town Attorney Ira Bloom said he has seen situations in other towns “where the site plan was approved, but not the text amendment.”
Still, he advised that the town should have some kind of text amendment in place, but, “You can narrow it down,” so that it does not have sweeping ramifications for other areas in town.
“A lot of towns …they tailor the text amendment,” Bloom said. “There is no spot zoning argument. You can create standards for this property in your text amendment.”
Still, the site plan as proposed (four-story with underground parking, 41,565 square feet with 44,000 to be added and modern looking metal siding ) was met with a number of objections from the public, Planning and Zoning Director Steve Palmer and P&Z members.
Palmer called it “a fairly marked change in elevation ….out of character with what’s been constructed in Westport.”
He added that it should be “more conformed to what Westporters consider reasonable.”
P&Z member Andra Vebell said she did not like the metal facade, calling it “really out of place for this town.”
“The metal facade feels like LA or downtown Stamford,” she said.
She also said she was opposed to the developer reducing the number of affordable units from 30 to 20 percent as part of the negotiations.
Stephens said he was concerned that the majority of the units were studios, the rest one- and two-bedroom units.
“Let’s talk about people,” he said. “Some of these rooms are smaller than hotel rooms we stay in on business.”
That, he said, would be unfair to families drawn to the town, so their children could attend the Westport school system.
Members of the public, too, also expressed their concern, not just with the site plan, but the project itself.
One woman said that it could conceivably add “at least 40 kids” to the Long Lots School. One man said argued that this project plus 43-units at the nearby Kowalsky property and 12 on the Gieger land, would enormously increase density in the Morningside Drive neighborhood, changing its entire dynamic.
P&Z members have scheduled a site visit of the property for Tuesday, June 7, at 8:15 a.m.
