Town mulls trade-offs for Hamlet at Saugatuck project
WESTPORT — Officials are looking at what restrictions and trade-offs make sense if a new zoning district is created in connection with the Hamlet at Saugatuck project and what it could mean for future development of the area.
ROAN Ventures is looking to create a new zoning district that would cover general business and the Saugatuck Marina. The area encompasses Railroad Place, Riverside Avenue, Franklin Street and Charles Street, and is currently zoned as a general business district.
The current proposal includes about 10 buildings ranging in height from 40 feet to about 65 feet, according to earlier presentations. Some proposed features include a 100-seat theater, a dock, condos, a hotel, retail buildings, restaurants and additional underground parking.
Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission have proposed possible bonuses that can be incorporated into the text amendment that would allow for extra height or closer setbacks for the buildings there in exchange for the developer to create public outdoor space — elements already included in ROAN’s proposal. However, commissioners worry about what the text amendment could mean for the other buildings in the area not owned by ROAN and so are seeking to add more clarity to the wording.
“I think we want to build into this framework flexibility for a reward for good design,” Planning and Zoning Commission Chair Danielle Dobin said at the commission’s first work session on the proposal now that the public hearing has closed.
Eleven properties are currently on the proposed zoning map to be changed, though only six are under ROAN Ventures’ control, Planning and Zoning Director Mary Young said.
“What’s a problem is what could come later,” Commission member Paul Libowitz said.
He said he is more worried about 601 Riverside Avenue, which is an area of the Tutti’s building that also encompasses the Black Duck, where the developers are planning to add two more buildings. He said he doesn’t want to see it jammed, have it up against the street and 65-foot buildings put in that spot.
He’s also concerned about 611 Riverside Ave., which can be can be sold to another buyer and developed, since ROAN doesn’t currently control it.
“This is entirely too big a parcel to not know what the future of it is,” he said.
Libowitz said he doesn’t want to see a 65-foot building in that
plot of land.
Dobin said they need to clarify what the trigger is for the height bonuses to create more open space.
The amendment currently reads that the height bonuses can occur “provided a minimum of 5,000 square feet of usable, open space accessible to the public is provided on any lot or integrated site,” but Dobin said it doesn’t specify what the 5,000 feet actually is.
She said as an example if ROAN Ventures, the developers, were to create 5,000 square feet of space along the river, that another developer could then read the text and interpret it that they do not need to do the same thing for their building to get the same bonuses.
Dobin also proposed adding a sentence setting the maximum height at 40 feet within a to-bedetermined distance from the
railroad tracks.
Dobin also said she wanted to add similar sentence about setbacks that “may allow a minimum front lot setback from zero to 10 feet, based on the creation of outdoor spaces accessible to the public or other public benefit.”
As for the residential unit sizes, multiple commission members said there isn’t a need to include that the “average gross interior floor area per dwelling unit will not exceed 2,750 square feet.”
Libowitz also suggested removing “New England” from the style of the buildings, as the architecture 10 years from now might be different, if another developer tries to build. He said the actual design should be explained more.
Several commission members said they weren’t opposed to the area being developed, but some still had concerns.
“I like the overall concept and
overall, I think it is better for Westport than if it wasn’t developed,” member Jon Olefson said. “While not perfect, maybe needing some tweaks, overall, I can get behind this.”
Libowitz said he is in favor of doing something and would be comfortable moving forward if some of his concerns were addressed.
He brought up a staff report from Planning and Zoning Director Mary Young in which she says that the restrictions placed by the commission are holding back what can be done at the site.
Young’s report also asks whether the extent change should be accepted in the area is fully known, and whether the proposal maximizes benefits to warrant the change.
Commission member Patricia Zucaro said she likes the way Saugatuck currently looks, though she isn’t opposed to developing
it.
“I do like the concept and the theory of sort of having mixed use there,” she said.
Zucaro said she would like to see more waterfront uses in the area.
However, she thinks that the project is still too big and it wouldn’t allow for open spaces.
“We’re talking about 40,000square-foot buildings,” she said.
Member Amie Tesler said she doesn’t believe that all change is inherently bad.
“I think change should be organic; I think it should be well executed; I think it should be thought out and time should be a factor,” she said.
She said she is not “intrinsically in favor” of the plan as it currently stands, but believes they can get to a point where she approves of the project.