On Tuesday, Nov. 12, two hours into a meeting that would stretch almost three hours more, the Planning and Zoning Commission grappled with whether and how to vote on Kimco’s two applications for the redevelopment of the southern portion of its Wilton Center River Rd. campus. At the prior meeting on Oct. 28, commissioners conducted an informal straw poll in which everyone present — many reluctantly — expressed that they were leaning toward approving the project.
Based on that discussion, Town Planner Michael Wrinn had prepared resolutions of approval for the entire redevelopment as proposed, including the five-story back building. But within moments of Tuesday’s discussion beginning, several commissioners began to express skepticism about whether Kimco’s package of public benefits met the standard of “exceptional” required to justify a bonus fifth story on Building B.
The public benefits Kimco has offered in exchange for the right to build a fifth story are:
- designating three units in the 168-unit complex as affordable housing;
- promising to secure LEED Silver certification; and
- allowing the town or local non-profits to host gatherings on the “Village Drive” side street (roughly where the Starbucks sits on the current site) at least four times per year.
In order to build the new complex, Kimco needs the town to approve a zone change (allowing it to use the new zoning overlay) and a special permit (to build the proposed structures). The Commission started with the zone change, a fairly procedural action, but confusion quickly arose over whether approving the zone change would obligate the Commission to approve the buildings themselves or just allow Kimco to access the overlay zoning rules. The vote on the proposed buildings themselves was postponed and the topic of the fifth story appears to be back in question.
What Are We Voting on Exactly?
Commissioner Eric Fanwick was the first to weigh in. “In the seven years that I’ve been on the Commission, I haven’t had a tougher vote. I haven’t given more thought to an action we’ve been taking than this one. The importance of this project, given where we are on other issues in town… I don’t think they met the level of extraordinary we defined in our code.”
At that point, the Commissioners sought guidance from Wrinn about whether, by voting in favor of the zone change, they were also effectively approving the project. The answer was not immediately clear, with conflicting responses in a series of exchanges over the next 30 minutes.
During the meeting, some commissioners expressed frustration about the way their comments have been excerpted in past news coverage, so the exchanges below with few exceptions are presented in full. In some cases, commissioners used the terms “exceptional” and “extraordinary” interchangeably to refer to the “exceptional public benefits” section of the zoning overlay.
Vice Chair Melissa-Jean Rotini: “Could I clarify something? The overlay [vote] is whether they meet the criteria of the overlay. It’s not actually what they’re building. Mike, help me out here, it’s not actually the application and the portion Eric is talking about, it’s whether or not they meet the criteria for the overlay, isn’t that correct?”
Wrinn: “No, they do go hand in glove, because you want to make sure that you’re able to use the overlay if they can show you a complying project that justifies using that overlay. You’re not going to give an overlay to a project that doesn’t meet the criteria for that form-based code.”
Commissioner Ken Hoffman: “I’ve got the same question. I’m going to word it a different way. I’ve given this a lot of thought since the last meeting and I don’t feel that what they presented meets my test of extraordinary. So does that mean… would we vote for the overlay, then we will vote again to accept the project?”
Wrinn: “They’re two totally different votes: you’ve got the overlay, then you’ve got the special permit itself.”
Hoffman: “If I’m voting to consider accepting this into the overlay, am I saying that I think it meets the test of extraordinary in the overlay?”
Chair Rick Tomasetti: “Absolutely not. The extraordinary only applies to the fifth story, which is a separate issue from the rest of the application. You can vote for the rest of the application and not vote for the fifth story and the nine units.”
Wrinn: “You’ve got to get through the point of having something that complies with form-based code [the overlay] in order to allow the overlay to occur. You’re not going to allow the overlay to go forward if you have a plan that doesn’t meet the requirements of the overlay.”
Commissioner Chris Pagliaro: “But the requirements of the overlay are complex, the fifth story is just one part of it. The criteria of this is the street line, the parking, the coverage, the building height notwithstanding the fifth story for the sake of conversation, the criteria of mixed use, the way the building turns a corner… it’s a zoning code in itself. The overlay is not the fifth story.”
Wrinn: “It doesn’t go out to any other properties. It’s just these two [lots] that we have under consideration.”
Fanwick: “So it doesn’t go to the project per se, just to the lots?”
Pagliaro: “Well, it goes to the project because the project has the massing of the project. It’s hard to describe.”
The full exchange can be viewed beginning at the 2-hour 27-minute mark of the town’s recording. Ultimately, the commissioners landed on an understanding that voting on the zone change that allows the property to use the new Wilton Center zoning overlay was distinct from voting to approve the project itself.
And does Kimco’s application meet the criteria for a zone change?
At that point, Commissioner Mark Ahasic asked a second time for clarity on the specific criteria, goals, and requirements for being approved to use the overlay. He challenged a clause in the proposed resolution stating that allowing Kimco to use the overlay zone aligned with the goals of the Plan of Conservation and Development, including the objective, “Encourage smaller-scale, lower cost, and/or multi-family housing.”
“Again, it goes back to the big issue of affordability, this only has 1.8% affordability,” he said.
Pagliaro and Tomasetti drew a distinction between building affordable housing (as defined and recognized by the state) and building housing that is affordable in a more colloquial sense.
“This is affordable in my opinion, Mark,” Pagliaro said. “It’s less money than buying a house.”
The proposed rents for the new Kimco complex have not been released and the company has not discussed what it sees as the rough market value of the units. The latest apartment complex to open in town, Riverside Wilton at 141 Danbury Rd., offers the following market rate rents:
- 1-bedroom units: $2,930-$3,650
- 2-bedroom units: $3,615- $5,130
- 3-bedroom units: $5,000- $5,840.
The discussion then veered into the merits of the fifth-story bonus, which the Commission agreed is a matter for debate on the special permit vote, not the zone change vote at hand that evening.
Tension mounts within the Commission
As the zone change vote drew near, Pagliaro issued a warning to fellow Commissioners: “If you’re going to vote no, you better have a good reason to put on the record for saying this doesn’t comply with the overlay, rather than a political decision.”
“Chris, I take offense at that statement,” Fanwick replied.
Tomasetti tried to move the group forward toward a vote, but Hoffman followed up. “You’re insisting people give their reason for their vote?” he asked.
Pagliaro then reasserted that individual Commissioners would have to state on the record why they were voting against the zone change. Tomasetti, seeming to disagree about the need for individual Commissioners to explain their votes when casting them, clarified that if a vote failed, the Commission’s resolution denying the application would state the rationale for the decision. Hoffman then asked whether Town Counsel would be available to advise the Commission on how to frame that rationale, which Wrinn and Tomasetti agreed would take place.
At that point, tensions rose again.
“I’d like to know why you feel that way,” Pagliaro said, seemingly to Hoffman.
“Time out, Commissioner Pagliaro,” Tomasetti said. “Commissioner Hoffman asked a specific question pertaining to his vote. You want to know why he’s going to vote the way he’s going to vote?”
Pagliaro then said he wasn’t trying to pick on anyone. “This isn’t about the fifth story. I don’t understand how this doesn’t qualify for the overlay. So I’d like to understand the thought process. Maybe they’ll convince me.”
After an extended period of silence, Fanwick replied. “I’m having trouble separating the overlay from the project itself. And in the project itself, I do not think they’ve made the case for the extraordinary [benefit.]”
The Commission then at last proceeded to a roll call vote. The resolution approving Kimco’s zone change to allow the property to use the new Wilton Center zoning overlay rules passed 6-1, with Fanwick voting against it.
What’s next for the special permit (and fifth-floor vote)?
In part two of this story, GOOD Morning Wilton will cover the commissioners’ discussion that continued regarding the special permit vote in the coming days. The Commission elected not to vote on that matter on Tuesday but requested that Wrinn bring a second version of the special permit resolution, — one approving the project without the bonus fifth story — to the Commission’s next meeting on Monday, Nov. 25.
In addition to the Kimco discussions, Tuesday evening the Commission held public hearings on a series of other proposed projects and finalized proposed language to add the intended 10% affordability requirement back into the Wilton Center overlay after it was mistakenly omitted in the regulation. The new zoning requirement will need to be reviewed by Wilton’s Town Counsel as well as surrounding towns and the Western Connecticut Council of Governments, after which it would go to a public hearing and then eventually a vote by the Commission. Kimco’s project, and any other applications that are submitted prior to this regulation change being voted on, will be able to build up to four stories in Wilton Center with zero affordable housing.
Note: Commissioners Anthony Cenatiempo and Chris Wilson were not in attendance at the Tuesday, Nov. 12 meeting with excused absences and thus did not vote on the zone change. If they attend on Nov. 25, they will have the right to resume their roles in deliberation and vote on the special permit.
Is Kimco buying Wilton a third ambulance? If not, this is a no-go. Pony up!