This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
12/11/2017 11:00 PMThe North Haven Housing Authority (NHHA) has been trying to get a new senior housing complex on Pool Road approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC), but its proposals have encountered resistance from the PZC and neighbors of the proposed project. NHHA is seeking an agreement with the PZC on some newly proposed changes for the project, in an attempt to settle the matter without a decision from court.
The new construction project would be a three floor, 50 unit affordable living complex that is age restricted to 55 and older. The project, at 555 Pool Road, has been in limbo for a little more than a year.
The initial application for the project was heard in October 2016. NHHA Chairman Richard LoPresti said project approval was being sought, so that the housing authority could apply for grant funding for the project. That didn’t happen, as the application was denied at a special PZC meeting on Oct. 20, 2016.
PZC Chairman Vern Carlson said the application was denied because the commission felt there were too many units crammed in at the project’s location, a concern echoed through wide opposition from neighbors.
LoPresti said after the decision from October 2016 was rendered, NHHA appealed the decision using 8-30g, the Connecticut Affordable Housing Land Use Appeals Procedure. That appeal is currently pending in court.
LoPresti said the judge in the case wanted to see if the matter could be settled out of court. LoPresti met with residents nearby the proposed development several times after the October 2016 decision to discuss potential changes to the project. At a PZC meeting on Nov. 13, another application for the project was heard before the commission.
The changes to the project brought forth at the Nov. 17 meeting were mostly cosmetic, and included changing the location of the Dumpster, changes to the exterior colors of the building, and added plantings for more of a buffer between properties.
LoPresti said at that meeting that the height of the building and number of units couldn’t be changed. The height because a pitched roof was necessary for a solar panel system. The number of units are related to the cash flow required, he said.
Residents speaking during the public comment portion of the November meeting still expressed concern about the location and size of the proposed development. Some residents weren’t opposed to another smaller type of building, but others were opposed to any type of building in that location.
“They always knew we couldn’t reduce the units and we couldn’t reduce the height, and we couldn’t relocate the building” due to funds already invested in the current site, LoPresti said. “If we move the building, it costs us another [$100,000], which we don’t have.”
The application with the changes submitted in November was initially on the agenda for deliberations at the PZC meeting held on Dec. 4, but LoPresti said that application has been withdrawn and the PZC given a rendering of the building with a flat roof along with the other changes proposed in November. No formal application was submitted
The flat roof still includes a solar panel system; LoPresti said the architect for the project told him that solar could be made to work with a flat roof design. LoPresti said the solar is an important aspect because it will help in the grant application process.
Carlson said the project is being discussed by the attorneys for the PZC and NHHA now, and if an agreement on what was most recently presented by NHHA is reached, a formal application would come before the PZC.
If no agreement is accepted, LoPresti said the matter will go back to court and the appeal of the October 2016 decision will proceed.
“If we go to court, none of the changes we made are in play,” LoPresti said. “It goes back to the original design with the pitched roof, the less fencing…and then the court will decide.”
According to the Connecticut Office of Legislative Research, developers can use the 8-30g appeals procedure to contest a municipality’s decision on an affordable housing development if fewer than 10 percent of the municipality’s housing units are affordable and the municipality has not qualified for a moratorium. North Haven has fewer than that 10 percent and hasn’t qualified for a moratorium.
To qualify as affordable housing in North Haven, a unit must cost no more than 30 percent of the income of a household earning 80 percent or less of the town’s median income. In North Haven, with a median household income of $86,340, an affordable unit would be reserved for a household earning no more than $69,072 annually, with a monthly housing cost of no more than $1,727.
The brief also states that municipalities cannot defend an appeal on the grounds that the application does not comply with land use regulations, and must show one of two things, the first that the decision was necessary to protect substantial public interests in health, safety, or other matters the municipal commission may legally consider, and that these interests clearly outweigh the need for affordable housing and cannot be protected by making reasonable changes to the proposed development. The second is that the development is receiving no government funds and located in an industrial zone that does not permit residential uses.