Lawyers Hint At Compromise On High Street Affordable Housing Plan

FAIRFIELD, CT — After months of hearings and hours of expert testimony, the attorneys representing competing interests for the future of a historic property in town appear close to compromise, although residents seem to be unwavering in their opposition to a proposed affordable housing development on the site.

Lawyers, neighbors and experts all spoke at a Town Plan and Zoning Commission hearing Tuesday about the project at 980 High St. The hearing was a continuation from a lengthy meeting Oct. 15.

The Fairfield Housing Corp. hopes to construct five buildings containing a total of 40 apartments, 70 percent of which would be affordable, on the 2.5-acre lot. The corporation bought the property about a year ago for just over $2 million. The site includes an open meadow, a wooded area, more than 4,000 square feet of wetlands and an 1895 Queen Anne-style house. The corporation plans to restore the home as office space and a community room.

Residents who oppose the project have raised more than $20,000, hired a lawyer to fight the proposal, and filed a petition to intervene in the proceedings and establish legal standing. Among their concerns are the potential for increased flooding, traffic, light and noise pollution, and parking issues.

The Inland Wetlands Agency narrowly denied the application after the proposal was discussed at length during several previous meetings. The housing corporation is appealing the denial in court.

Despite months of debate, attorneys Bryan LeClerc and Joel Green appeared almost conciliatory Tuesday night, when they told the zoning commission that after LeClerc finished his presentation on behalf of the corporation they wanted to continue the hearing to January, with Green calling witnesses in the new year.

"There have been some encouraging and meaningful discussions between the parties," said Green, who is representing the intervening residents.

Commission Chair Matthew Wagner, a Republican, questioned whether the lawyers' ongoing dialogue would result in changes to the corporation's application. Green said it might, but LeClerc said changes are not currently being discussed.

"It's a bit of an awkward procedural position to be in right now," Wagner said. "... It seems like we're spinning our wheels here."

Wagner noted community members had attended commission meetings twice already and were now being told to come back again.

"It's just not perceived well by folks," he said.

Resident response

Residents took to the microphone to express their displeasure during the public hearing Tuesday.

Representative Town Meeting member Alex Durrell, a Republican from District 3, called the project a "shoehorned, man-made hazard," while member Lisa Havey, a Democrat from District 6, criticized the volume of the proposal.

"The gross size of this is inappropriate and I'll leave it at that," she said. "i'm going to ask that you deny this application."

Resident Jan Reber noted that at a previous Inland Wetlands Agency meeting, the housing corporation presented 500 pages of documents that the public had not had a chance to review. Reber took issue with the practice.

Wagner responded that the commission received a revised affordable housing plan Tuesday evening.

"I'm not sure when I was supposed to look at that," he said. "... Your point is well taken."

Proposal specifics

During expert testimony Tuesday, ecologist Bill Kenny said the project would include a 6-foot privacy fence and a hedge of evergreen trees along the north and south border of the property. Traffic engineer Michael Galante said the development would generate 20 car trips during morning peak travel hours and 26 car trips during afternoon peak hours, rendering any traffic impact "insignificant." At the previous hearing Oct. 15, architect Paul Bailey said the five apartment buildings would be about 30 feet tall, with units ranging in size from 770 square feet to 1,740 square feet.

Housing corporation Executive Director Carol Martin told the commission Tuesday that 10 of the apartments would be rented for 40 percent state area median income, 16 would be rented for 60 percent median income and three would be rented for 80 percent median income. A chart provided by Martin showed rents for the affordable units ranging from $333 to $1,375. The development would have six three-bedroom apartments, 16 two bedrooms and 18 one bedrooms, LeClerc has said.

The housing corporation is seeking several zoning regulation amendments, a zone change and zoning compliance approval. Under the state law Section 8-30g, the only way for the town to avoid approving the High Street proposal is by proving the project warrants zoning denial because it poses a threat to public health, welfare and safety that outweighs Fairfield's need for affordable housing. Section 8-30g applies to towns where less than 10 percent of housing stock meets state criteria to be recognized as affordable.

Housing corporation questions

Also Tuesday, Wagner questioned Martin about the role of the housing corporation and its purpose as the development arm of the Fairfield Housing Authority. Wagner expressed concern after Martin said the housing corporation's mission is to explore affordable housing in Fairfield County, and the organization is not required to build only in Fairfield. The authority's commissioners are appointed by Fairfield's first selectman.

"Do you see how that might strike some as being problematic?" Wagner asked.

Martin argued that the corporation board is separate from the housing authority board, and that if there was no land available in Fairfield, the corporation would consider other communities.

"I'm not sure why that would be a problem," she said. "... We really see it as a regional and county issue."

So far, the corporation has only undertaken projects in Fairfield, she said.