“Public Acceptance is Not a Zoning Criteria”

Public hearings for the Parkside Village 1 affordable housing proposal are nearing completion, and the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission could reach a decision in December or early January.

About 120 people attended the third session of hearings Thursday at the community room at Branford Fire Headquarters. The next session will be Dec. 7 at 7 p.m. at the same location.

Several people spoke both for and against the proposal, which has garnered push-back from many neighbors. The issue is whether the current zoning should be changed to allow construction of a new building to house low-income people of all ages. The three Parkside Village 1 buildings were built in the 1970’s, and are not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A second complex on adjacent property, Parkside 2, was built in 1985, and has been updated with state grants. The buildings currently house low-income senior citizens and people with disabilities.

The proposed project has generated considerable opposition from neighbors, who have signed a petition and set up signs in the area around Parkside, which is located at 115 South Montowese St.

One neighbor said living in an age-diverse community makes her feel younger; while another alleged bringing more families to the town will burden the school system and town services.

In other action, the commission unanimously approved a request for the Shoreline Community Church to relocate to 7 – 9 Business Park Drive.

In new business, the commission set a public hearing for Jan. 4 for a request from property owners at Exit 56 to amend zoning regulations to allow for time extensions for site plan approval in a Planned Development District (PDD). The request was made by the 595 Corporate Circle corporation, which is owned by Charles Weber and Al Secondino, who spearheaded the effort to bring Costco and seven other retail businesses to Exit 56. Costco eventually pulled out of the project, and the timeframe for the PDD would have expired at the end of July. The commission voted to extend it, even though that option was not in the regulations. (link July 31)

The commission also agreed to take a closer look at PDD regulations since there are several in the community, including Anchor Reef, the proposed Atlantic Wharf, and Sterling Ridge.

Affordable Housing Debate Continues

Rita Berkson (pictured), of Linden Avenue, said she is a senior citizen who has enjoyed living in a multi-generational neighborhood since she moved there 25 years ago.

“We were taken by the diversity of this neighborhood. We were taken by the combination of elderly folks and young families,” she said, adding that she enjoys watching the kids play.

“It makes me feel like I’m in the middle of life, and I want to feel that way as long as possible,” Berkson said. ​“I think that elderly and young families living nearby is life-giving to both.”

Sandra Kraus (pictured), of Montgomery Parkway, who is an alternate member of the Inland Wetlands Commission, said she is concerned that having families at Parkside would put a burden on the schools and town services. (Enrollment in the town’s public schools has been declining for years.)

She estimated there could be 57 school-age children at Parkside and that could result in educational costs of $570,000 a year, since it costs at least $10,000 yearly to educate one child in Connecticut. ​“More people, more police calls, more fire calls,” Kraus claimed. Earlier this month Kraus lost her race for town tax collector to Roberta Gill-Brooks, the first African-American woman in Branford to run for public office. 

Johnathan Katz (pictured), of Sybil Creek Place, said he is delighted about the project and is not concerned about having additional students in the school district. He said the current Parkside buildings are blighted.

“People in this town who are not as fortunate as some of us in this room deserve standard housing to live in,” Katz said. ​“This is an opportunity for them to get that, it’s an opportunity for this town to solve a serious problem that poses a health and safety risk to some of our more vulnerable people — the elderly and people who cannot afford better housing.”

Damian Platosh, of South Montowese Street, said that allowing a new zoning designation would be spot zoning in his view.

“Don’t think it stops with this,” Platosh said. ​“Spot zoning is going to grow like a cancer. I call it cancer zoning — not a spot zone,” He said this project will lead to other proposals nearby that would ruin the Indian Neck neighborhood. He submitted a list of 50 reasons why the project should be denied.

Attorney John Parese, of the Parrett, Porto, Parese and Colwell law firm in Hamden, represents neighbors who oppose the project. Parese again discussed what neighbors consider to be public safety issues.

Attorney: ​“Public Acceptance is Not a Zoning Criteria”

Timothy Hollister (pictured), a partner at Shipman & Goodwin in Hartford and an expert in land use law, represents the developers. He told the audience that people at previous hearings stated it might be easier to gain public acceptance if age restrictions were maintained. “Public acceptance is not a zoning criteria,” he said Thursday.

He also said some comments were “inaccurate factually and were based on assumptions about potential residents that were based on household income as to what their conduct was going to be.” People have stated there would be an increase in crime and safety issues if poor families were allowed to live in the neighborhood. Click here to read the story.

Hollister said they have reviewed the Parkside property title and other legal documents. “There is no deed restriction that requires this to be elderly housing,” he said.

Hollister said it is easier to obtain funding for an affordable housing project if the building is open to all ages, and that the federal application gives 12 points for allowing all ages. The application has a total of 103 points. “That is quite a significant point issue,” he said Applications are judged on a point system, with points being granted for various aspects of the project.

Fred Russo, who is an alternate member of the P&Z Commission, once again expressed concerns about the project. “I see a good intention being driven by the wrong reasons … but it’s also changing dramatically the services that are provided for those who are there now. It’s not going to be for elderly,” he said.

Doug Denes , who chairs the Housing Authority, said the current buildings are not maintainable financially or physically, and that the Housing Authority is operating on a shoe-string budget. “We’ve been functioning for years on duct tape and bubble gum to patch things together. Our units are incredibly tiny and do not meet any ADA standards,” he said. “We need new facilities to move forward.”

Beacon Communities LLC of Boston, who are developing the project for the Housing Authority, are applying under state statute 8-30g affordable housing. The developers are requesting a new zoning designation for the site, which would be called “Parkside Assisted Housing District.” The site is currently zoned Residential 3. 

Applications under state statute 8-30g operate under different rules that other proposals. If the commission denies the project and an appeal is filed, the commission has the burden of proof. They must show that the decision was supported by the evidence on the public record and that it was based on substantial public health or safety issues, and that those issues outweigh the need for affordable housing.

Town attorney Bill Aniskovich and First Selectman Jamie Cosgrove (pictured first row) attended the meeting but did not speak. Attorney Danielle M. Bercury, of Brenner, Saltzman & Wallman, the town’s law firm, was also in attendance.

###