Key Points
- Kimco presented its first plans for Phase II of the Wilton Campus redevelopment, adding 225 apartments in two new residential buildings.
- Commissioners raised early concerns about architecture, parking, public space, walkability and affordable housing before a formal application is submitted.
- The proposal would bring the redevelopment to 393 apartments and could take about four years to complete if approved.
Why It Matters: Phase II would reshape a key Wilton Center property, add hundreds of apartments and could play an important role in the town’s affordable housing strategy under Connecticut’s 8-30g law.
A month-and-a-half after Wilton’s Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) unanimously approved minor architectural modifications to Kimco Realty‘s first phase of the Wilton Campus redevelopment at 15-21 River Rd., the developer returned Monday with its much-anticipated Phase II proposal.
The proposal calls for demolishing the site’s remaining office building and replacing it with two new four-story residential buildings containing 225 apartments, bringing the mixed-use redevelopment to a total of 393 residential units.
P&Z heard Kimco’s pre-application proposal at its Jul. 28 meeting, during which commissioners offered extensive early feedback on the proposal, focusing on the proposed number of affordable apartments, architecture, parking, and walkability and public access to green space.
Kimco — doing business as Wilton Campus 1691, LLC — said that the “Phase II” proposal became possible after all of the site’s remaining office tenants vacated the building, leaving it completely empty.
The “Phase I” development approved by P&Z in November 2024 capped three years of often contentious review, revision, and debate over a range of issues including the provision of public amenities, the addition of a fifth floor on one or both buildings, and the inclusion of affordable housing — which Kimco decreased from 16 units in the initial application to just three in the final proposal approved by P&Z thanks to a loophole in the zoning regulations.
Kimco Vice President for Development Nick Brown told the commissioners that the company plans to begin construction on Phase I “within about two months’ time,” after which they expect construction to require “a solid two years” followed by another year to fully lease the residential and commercial units. He predicted that the overall project could take at least four years to complete.
“We Certainly Have Our Work Cut Out for Ourselves”
The proposal would replace the existing 118,000-square-foot office building with two four-story apartment buildings at the center of the 12-acre parcel. The larger structure would contain 174 one-, two- and three-bedroom and studio apartments surrounding a 10,000-square-foot internal courtyard with a private pool, and an enclosed multistory parking garage. The second, smaller building would contain 51 apartments of various sizes. Other amenities include a clubhouse, lawn areas with outdoor seating, a walking path and a dog run.
Brown noted that Kimco would be pursuing LEED Gold certification for the Phase II buildings, a higher standard than the LEED Silver requirement specified for the Phase I buildings.
Following Kimco’s presentation, commissioners zeroed in on several areas of concern:
- Architecture: The centerpiece of Phase II, referred to as “Building C,” drew criticism for both its shape and size. P&Z Vice Chair Mark Ahasic called it “massive” and noted that it lacked the more visually appealing wraparound designs of the two proposed buildings in Phase I. P&Z Chair Ken Hoffman also criticized the massing on the building’s corners, which were not set back like the rest of the building. Commissioner Margit Ritz suggested that green space could be added to the flat concrete roof to provide visual variety, and commissioner Anthony Cenatiempo suggested that Beinfield explore breaking up the building into several smaller ones.
- Parking: Several commissioners pointed out that parking in Wilton Center was already at a premium, and emphasized that Kimco should ensure there would be enough spaces for both residents and shoppers. P&Z Secretary Michelle Saglimbene noted that parallel parking along Village Dr. will likely only add to the congestion, especially since the road will not be widened with additional lanes. Cenatiempo urged the developer to open up the Building C garage to non-residential parking. Brown pledged to provide a detailed traffic study as part of its formal application to P&Z, and explore ways to add more parking spaces than strictly required by code.
- Public Space: Commissioner Trevor Huffard suggested that one way to improve the designers’ emphasis on walkability would be to replace part or all of the proposed road alongside Building C with green space, and he suggested improving the undeveloped back side of the property with a grass promenade and possibly a perimeter walkway for joggers.
- Affordable Housing: The two phases will have different affordability requirements, which will likely be a flash point for future negotiations. Because of the inadvertent loophole in the Wilton Center zoning regulations in force at the time, Phase I is required to have only three affordable units priced for the area median income. Under regulations currently in force, Phase II will be required to have at least 22 units priced according to the lower state median income. Saglimbene noted that the lower number of affordable units in Phase I would mean the total number would fall below 10%. Brown indicated Kimco expects to comply with the regulations.
“This is the reason why we’re here tonight, is to get a lot of great ideas on the table, and we certainly have our work cut out for ourselves,” Brown told the commissioners at the end of the discussion.
Will New Proposal Rekindle Debate Over Affordable Housing at Wilton Campus?
The proposal to construct additional rental units in Wilton Center comes at a time when the current P&Z commission continues working to position Wilton for a future affordable housing moratorium under Connecticut’s 8-30g statute.
Under 8-30g, municipalities where less than 10% of housing stock has been set aside for median-income renters and buyers, developers are entitled to sidestep local zoning regulations provided they designate at least 30% of a project’s units for median-income occupancy. To prevent that, the town has two options: it can either increase the total number of affordable units to reach the 10% threshold, or it can earn a four-year moratorium on developers seeking to sidestep the regulations by increasing the number of median-income units by at least 2%, which, in Wilton’s case, is 132 units.
Earlier this month, the commissioners unanimously adopted new regulations using state median income as a basis for calculating the number of units in at least some developments that will be priced below market rates — in part because residential developments that use the state median income count toward the moratorium.
With nearly 400 new apartments planned — 168 in the approved Phase I development and 225 in the proposed Phase II — Kimco’s Wilton Center redevelopment will likely play a significant role in Wilton’s affordable housing strategy over for the next several years.
Between the planned units in-town, the activity near the train station, and the appartments near Rings End and ASML, has P&Z thought about the pressure on the Wilton school system that this might create? Has there been any consideration of adding any 55 and older housing in town?
TRAFFIC WITHIN THE VILLAGE CENTER HAS ALREADY INCREASED EXPONENTIALLY OVER THE PAST YEAR. I SHUDDER TO THINK WHAT THE ADDITION OF 400 MORE APARTMENTS WILL DO TO THE TRAFFIC FLOW! AT WHAT POINT DOES P AND Z SAY “ENOUGH!!” (LIKE DARIEN)
Why hasn’t the article addressd the real concern traffic? Do we really want to end up like Norwalk or is it to late?
Let’s face it. It was not because of a loophole that Kimco was allowed to have only three affordable housing units. It was because of poor oversight on the part of the previous P&Z. Thank goodness the current commissioners are on top of things now, and are making thoughtful suggestions that will benefit the town and everyone in it. Let’s just hope there are no “loopholes” this time.
This is hideous. Another flat-roofed monstrosity. And as for affordable units, P&Z should insist — since it messed up in the first place — that Phase II must include enough affordable units to bring the projects TOTAL to or above 10%. Ack!
It makes no sense to add all the apartments that are going in without adding some retail. People are moving here from everywhere but have to go to other places to shop. It would be beautiful to have some retail stores and more people attracting places here and financially beneficial to Wilton. How nice it would be to walk through this area and have places for people to enjoy. In addition to the people who will move into these new apartments, there are people in the condos nearby who wish Kimco would do an overhaul of the area. The community will greatly benefit from a multiuse complex and people here will financially benefit as well. Why spend money on gas when we have the potential to have everything we’d love and need here? Best Wishes Cris
Awful! Wilton now will look like Norwalk. Congestion in the city center seems of zero concern. Good luck with parking etc. Our town deserves better!
Kimco’s new proposal to add two more buildings, while again seeking approval for a fifth story, is deeply concerning. If this proposal requests additional height beyond the zoning regulations, I would like to know what specific public benefit is being offered to justify another exception.
In the past, the Commission accepted a fifth story based on promises of community events, such as block parties. Respectfully, I do not believe occasional events constitute a meaningful or lasting public benefit that offsets the permanent impact of increased building height, density, traffic, and changes to the character of our town. Temporary social events do not mitigate the long-term consequences of larger buildings.
I also have serious concerns about parking. Based on the renderings, I struggle to see how the site can realistically accommodate 393 parking spaces, let alone enough parking to serve residents, their guests, and the proposed commercial uses. Many households own two vehicles, and commercial businesses require dedicated customer and employee parking. Before this application moves forward, I believe the Commission should require a detailed parking analysis demonstrating that the proposed parking supply is adequate under realistic conditions rather than theoretical calculations.
Finally, Sewer capacity should be preserved for essential public needs before it is allocated to additional high-density private development. If Wilton eventually needs to expand or build new school facilities to accommodate future enrollment, adequate sewer capacity will be critical. The Commission should consider these long-term infrastructure needs before approving projects that consume a limited public resource.
Once again, I hope the Commission carefully evaluates the long-term impact this project will have on Wilton’s village character, infrastructure, traffic, and quality of life.
I hope everyone who post here email P&Z and let them know. This would destroy any village like feel!!!!
What happened to the mixed use? Where is the retail?
Seems to me that building commercial space into the ground floors along the new Village Court road would be a good idea. Wilton needs more opportunities to attract foot traffic in the town center area. That would help
What is status of sewer allowance fron Norwalk. Wilton was @99%.
With just under 400 multi bedroom apts, what will happen when — not if— capacity is exceeded.
🤔Do toilets and sinks backup 🤢
Wilton VILLAGE Ctr is turning into busy, congested bedroom suburb of the Norwalk-Stamford corridor— SIGH🙂↕️
I couldn’t help but notice the resistance It’s understandable when a project directly affects your own neighborhood/ town—people naturally become concerned about traffic, density, neighborhood character, and property values.
What is difficult to reconcile is that these are the very concerns many Connecticut residents have raised for years, only to be told they were standing in the way of “progress.” Through one-party rule in Hartford, Democrats have steadily stripped towns of meaningful zoning authority, using laws like 8-30g and other state mandates to override local decision-making in the name of affordable housing.
Now those same policies have arrived in your own backyard.
This is the predictable consequence of concentrating power in Hartford. When one party dominates state government, local voices become secondary, and communities lose the ability to shape their own future. Wilton is experiencing the results of decisions made by legislators who believed they knew better than the towns themselves.
It is ironic that the arguments now being made against this development—preserving neighborhood character, respecting local planning, considering the impact on existing residents—are the very arguments that have too often been dismissed when made by others.
Perhaps this experience will reinforce the importance of restoring home rule and returning zoning decisions to the communities that have to live with them, regardless of which political party happens to benefit.
Perhaps this is also a reminder that voting out of anger toward one national political figure can have very real local consequences. The relentless focus on opposing Donald Trump helped produce one-party rule in Connecticut, and one-party rule produced the very zoning policies that now threaten your own neighborhood. Elections have consequences, and this is one of them.