MONROE, CT — Neighbors against Sun Valley Glen, an eight-lot cluster housing subdivision proposed at 1536 and 1564 Monroe Turnpike, expressed their frustration during the public comments portion of the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing Thursday night, and two speakers asked the chairman to recuse himself from the application over comments he made at a meeting on Oct. 2.
“It’s going to be developed,” Chairman Michael O’Reilly said of the 30-acre property during the Oct. 2 meeting. “It’s private property. To me, it makes more sense to leave more of the property wild and undeveloped. Someone could come in and say, ‘I’m going to develop the whole thing.'”
“We can’t stop private owners from developing their land. It’s America,” O’Reilly added. “It’s going to be developed — ‘which way do you want it to be developed?'”
At Thursday’s continued hearing, Mark Lamont, of Downs Road, pointed out how Commissioner Leon Ambrosey had recused himself from the application, because of comments he made about opposing more cluster housing applications in town at this time.
Then Lamont expressed his opinion that O’Reilly should also recuse himself over his comments. “Mr. O’Reilly said this development will happen,” Lamont said. “Is the outcome predetermined?”
“I would like Mr. O’Reilly to be recused as Mr. Ambrose has, because people don’t have a right to build on an unbuildable lot,” Kelley Hangos-Carrano, of Scholz Road, agreed. “People have a right to build on a buildable lot.”
“We’ve been fighting this for two years, and if Mr. O’Reilly is going to stand up and say he has a right to build on his lot, maybe we don’t need planning and zoning anymore,” she said.
O’Reilly later responded to allegations that an approval of the cluster housing proposal is predetermined. “I would say, if that is true it wouldn’t be here two years,” he said. “We’re here to make sure it follows the rules of the Planning and Zoning Commission.”
O’Reilly also noted how the commission will hire its own expert to review the applicant, Jans Land Development LLC’s hydrologist’s report to ensure proper procedures were followed.
Commissioner Ryan Condon alluded to one speaker’s recollection of how two homes were approved on one of the parcels in 2000, so he contended the property is developable.
Condon also pointed out that O’Reilly had said the site will be developed, but not necessarily that it would be this development. Condon said he does not think the chairman needs to recuse himself.
A pending contract
The commission approved the scope of work in a contract proposal for Tighe & Bond, an engineering firm, to perform a third party review of the hydrology report done by Karen DeStefanis, vice president of WSP, who works for the applicant.
First Selectman Terry Rooney will bring the contract to the Town Council to vote on at its meeting Monday night. If the Council approves it, William Holsworth, who is filling in for Planning and Zoning Administrator Kathleen Gallagher, estimates that Tighe & Bond will have a report for the commission within two weeks.
Jans Land Development’s representatives did not make presentations Thursday, choosing to wait until this process is completed.
Christopher Russo, the attorney for the applicant, asked for an extension of the hearing, providing more time for the commission to receive its expert’s report. The request was approved unanimously on Thursday.
Public comments
Paula Jelly, of Cottage Street, whose property is surrounded by the proposed development on three sides, asked what the process is for a conventional subdivision and how it differs from a cluster housing application.
Lamont recalled how the owner of the property at 1536 Monroe Turnpike asked to build four homes with a road in 2000, before the commission approved two homes with a shared driveway. The developer did not pursue that approval.
Lamont contended it was basically the same footprint as the current proposal to build eight homes and asked what about the land changed that would allow six more houses.
Lamont also said there are different techniques to test a water table without drilling, but the hydrologist for the applicant did not do any of them to determine the feasibility of having eight wells without impacting existing wells in the area.
Instead, Lamont said she relied on old information and general statistics. “Without definitive studies, we just don’t know what could be there — and testing can be done,” he said.
He reiterated the question posed by several neighbors asking, if the development is approved and there is a negative impact on area wells, who is responsible?
“Are eight homes worth the risk to 60-plus homes that could potentially lose their water supply?” Lamont asked.
Michele Soltiesiak, of Cottage Street, said she still believes numbers from the applicant’s hydrologist are not right and that she is using general statistics.
Soltiesiak also expressed concerns over clear cutting of trees and of the potential spike in water usage for eight new homes in an area with dry periods.
If the applicant had a regular subdivision with two-acre lots, Soltiesiak asked if that would potentially lead to an approval for less homes, which she said could find “a happy medium” for the developer and the neighbors.
“They have a right to build, but we have a right to enjoyment of our properties,” Soltiesiak said. “I get it, somebody wants to max it out and make as much as they can, but I want you guys to consider the little guys live there too.”
Hangos-Carrano said a commission subcommittee put through a special exemption last year allowing the housing to be built without public water as is the current standard.
Donna Konkol, of Manor Drive, said the applicant’s hydrologist testified that wells for the cluster housing could be an issue for properties with deep wells that are uphill from 1536 and 1564 Monroe Turnpike. She also asked who will be responsible if Sun Valley Glen makes wells go dry.
“I agree that the developer, if this is approved, should pay a substantial bond should an issue come up,” Konkol said.
All respectful comments with the commenter’s first and last name are welcome.
Another consideration in cluster building is septic systems. I live in a one acre zone that was built in the mid ’60s. I have lived here for over 52 years. The area has a high water table and many lots flood during severe storms. This affects the capacity of their leaching fields. Over 50% of these houses needed to expand and/or relocate their fields over the years. This was not a problem as available land was on their one acre lots. This may not be the case on some cluster sites as that land is swamp. About the only solution in this situation would be sewers. So far, sewers have been a dream over the 52 years that I have lived here. And, if the septic system fails in one of these cluster sites, it will be a nightmare for those homeowners who will probably sue the town for allowing this exception to zoning.