This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
07/02/2024 05:40 PMEAST HAVEN
On June 26, the East Haven Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) unanimously denied an application for affordable housing from Hamden-based developer 13 Carlson Place LLC to construct 20 single-family dwelling units on Thompson Avenue.
The application from Carlson Place envisioned six triplex units and one duplex unit occupying 1.05 acres, sitting between the boundaries of Carlson Place and Thompson Avenue. Representing the applicant, attorney Stephen Studder told the PZC that proposed development would be at a “good location” with nearby access to several bus routes and that the downtown area and would support East Haven’s state-mandated housing goals by providing affordable dwellings for future occupants.
Although the applicant’s own traffic report concluded that “there will be no negligible impact on traffic patterns” and that they would be willing to carve out enough space for access to public safety officials such as the East Haven Fire Department (EHFD), these views were not shared by public testimony at a May 1 public hearing and by members of the PZC on June 26.
In their motion to deny the application, the PZC officially stated that “this is clearly a safety issue.” The PZC and Thompson Avenue-area residents believed the application presented stressors to public health and safety, along with a lack of fitness within the neighborhood and privacy toward residents. The PZC saw these concerns as far outweighing the need for affordable housing.
Commissioner John Tarducci did not agree “professionally” that the proposed development would fit harmoniously within the Thompson Avenue area, a characteristic which attorneys representing the applicant professed to the PZC. Instead, he saw that Thompson Commons would be “so out of place” and bring excessive density to the area.
“From the first time I took a look at the plans, I felt that it was so out of place,” Tarducci said. “We know what the density of the neighborhood is, and this far exceeds that, and it far exceeds anything that we've approved.”
On the topic of fitness aspect, PZC Chair Marlene Asid said that “the commission requested modification to the plan for a more aesthetic fit to the area and more amenable to the neighboring public and the site itself. The applicant refused.”
Connecting density with the issue of affordability, Asid criticized the prospective developers of Thompson Commons for their “greed of reimbursement by overdeveloping a parcel that includes affordable housing as a means to gain approval.”
“Who suffers? Not the developer, but what they leave behind,” she added.
Commissioners also expressed safety concerns with regards to accessibility of the EHFD to the area. In May, EHFD Chief Matthew Marcarelli informed the PZC of his concerns that fire apparatus would have both insufficient ingress and egress space to attend to an emergency and turning radius.
In a letter dated May 1, Marcarelli told the commission that the application’s inadequate traffic study as it pertains to access by public safety amounts to “a public safety issue and a fire department operational issue” which could affect neighbors and surrounding traffic.
Asid said that Marcarelli’s documented concern was “expert information to support a denial based on public safety issues,” which is the only kind of evidence the commission was allowed to use for its eventual rejection of what is an application for affordable housing.
Commissioners also agreed that the development could eat up an already scarce space for parking by residents in the area, a point of concern brought up by residents at the May 1 hearing.
Asid said that a parking ban along Thompson Avenue which could have been enforced as part of the development “would only further the neighbor's objection to this complex,” since such a ban would have to be brought publicly to the Board of Police Commissioners. Asid felt that additional irony was found in a potential parking ban since a ban would “prevent overflow parking from the proposed complex,” offering less parking capacity in the neighborhood.
“The proposed complex seems to have ample parking, and further irony is the complex would use the neighborhood streets for overflow parking. What a mess,” said Asid.