Protect the Partrick Wetlands
and our Community


Presentation in Opposition to 22 House Cluster Development on the Partrick Wetlands

Presenter: Mark Van Summern
The OSRD Zone, Road Designations


Associated Powerpoint

Westport Planning and Zoning

ARS Proposed Development

1.                  My presentation will address the OSRD zone as it relates to this proposed development and demonstrate to the commission that the proposed development does not comply with the regulations.

2.                  Mr. Weisman raised the point in his presentation that testimony given by professionals and experts was to be given more weight by the commission vs. that of a good natured neighbor.

My presentation will address zoning issues and I am an expert. I am a licensed architect in the state of Connecticut and have practiced architecture for over 20 years. I am a 3rd generation architect and graduate of the University of Michigan, one of the top architectural programs in the country. While there, I studied architectural design, site planning, landscape design, solar engineering, and environmentally sustainable design. I was president of my own 30-person office for 18 years in Stamford CT, and am now a principal and owner in one of the largest and most respected architectural practices in the United States.

3.                  I’d like to start by briefly discussing the philosophy behind the creation of the OSRD zone and “conservation subdivision” concepts that were raised by Randall Arndt at the meeting on May 1st.

In many towns and cities across the country new approaches to zoning are continually evolving to deal with issues of conservation and the need to help control and maintain sprawl and over development. The framers of the OSRD had these good intentions in mind when they recognized a need in town to both increase housing stock and to maintain and preserve open space and the natural environment. As an example, in certain areas of Wyoming their “OSRD” occurs on a much larger scale. You need 36 acres to build 3 homes, and when you build them they must be clustered close together to preserve the most amount of open space. This allows for the continuation of cross lot grazing rites, wildlife migration, and the preservation of the natural environment.

 

4.                  Now lets take a moment to examine what Westports OSRD zone is looking to achieve:

·        Clustered homes on minimum 50 acre sites

·        Preservation of the residential character of Westport

·        Reduce potential traffic and drainage impacts on the land

·        And to provide good layout and design for housing that may occur in environmentally sensitive areas.

 

What are a few of the key zoning requirements for a development to qualify as a OSRD zone?

  • The site must have frontage on or direct access to a major thoroughfares or a arterial street.
  • Each lot within an OSRD shall have a minimum of 10 acres, and a minimum frontage of 50 feet on an arterial street.
  • That in the town of Westport no more than 180 homes can be built in total in all OSRD zones combined.

 

Associated with this, 3 of the key design principals include the following:

1.                  A development that should be accessed at 2 points of entry for safety reasons.

2.                  That there should be clusters of development to preserve uplands, create natural linkages within and adjacent to the site, and maintain homes hidden within the site.

3.                  That the homes developed within the OSRD feed to major throughoufare road systems to support the demand.

 

 

Now lets look at the proposed site plan to really understand what has been presented.

 

5.                  Much has been said about how many acres are being preserved and not developed. How the developer reduced the amount of homes from 24 to 22 to improve the quality of the development. We even had Mr. Arndt praising the development and noting how it preserves open land and will be a great place for the residents to sit back and enjoy the woods, just like those folk who reside at homes developed on golf courses with views out to the fairways (not my personal choice). Also that the development would be ever better without sidewalks, which just repeated the developers wishes. Unfortunately I was less than impressed with Mr. Arndt’s presentation based on his credentials. All he did was to react to a site plan already designed vs. applying his skills to really examine and develop the site based on his expertise. In fact if we applied his principles of conservation subdivision design to this site, (as outlined here in his feature article in Planning Commissioners Journal), there would be a very large question as to whether this site supports any development at all.

He states that the minimum percentage of land that shall be designated open space includes 50% of the total track area, after discounting 100% of primary conservation areas to establish the “Adjusted Tract Acreage”, and 50% of the secondary conservation areas. By following this procedure, the OSRD zone when applied to this track of land cannot exist.

In addition he comments that when evaluating the layout of lots and open space the planning commission shall evaluate proposals to determine whether the proposed plan meets 14 specific criteria, one of which is that the proposal maintains or creates an upland buffer of natural native species vegitation of at least 100’ in depth adjacent to wetlands and surface waters.

 

NOW EXPLAIN AND POINT TO REFERENCES

 

Here’s what really going on:

·        The developer is forcing 22 homes on the only 9 buildable acreas of the entire site, and filing the entire application as a single lot.  When you look closely you will see two homes forced on less than an acre, six homes set on less than 3 acreas, and the balance of 14 homes compressed on the only remaining 5 buildable acreas of the site.

·        A site composed of islands of land that make up a large percentage (7+ acres to be exact) of the buildable “property not being developed”, and that counts fully toward allowable coverage.

·        A massive wetland area that is the majority of this site, and of the area that counts toward the 50-acre minimum requirement to qualify as a OSRD zone.

·        A proposed development the pushes the limit of the buildable area of the site. In fact a majority of the homes back doors sit on the rear protection line, where the owners won’t be able to enjoy any of the normal activities that take place at other neighborhood homes back yards ie lawns, swing sets and cookouts.

·        Frontage on collector streets that do not meet the requirements as major thoroughfares or arterial streets as defined in the 1997, 1987 or 1960 proposed town plan.

·        And a proposed development conceived as “3 distinct neighborhoods” (to quote directly from Mr. Weisman and the architect), which must be considered 3 separate lots or at a minimum 2 lots based on the physical division of the property by Poplar Plains Brook and the Wetlands, and the three distinct and principal points of access.  POINT OUT ANY OTHER FEATURES NOW BEFORE CLOSE OF SECTION

 

6.                  This is clearly not the intent of the framers of the OSRD

As stated there is at a minimum 2 separate lots, each with only a single point of  access to each neighborhood, with access via collector streets that do not meet the OSRD requirements.

In fact, in my professional opinion, this site has a very difficult time supporting a OSRD zone classification and is a better fit with a AAA designation in keeping with the neighborhood and its past history.   PAUSE – SWITCH UP MAPS

 

7.                  The Town attorney has indicated that the 1960 town plan for roadway classification is the guide to use when evaluating the conformance of roadways that service this OSRD zone. In the research process for this application it was recorded that Partrick Road was classified as a major throughofare in the 1960 town plan.  This is a mistake that was made which I will now explain.

 

Let’s look at the 1987 and 1960 transportation maps side by side.

 

In 1960 the town had developed an overall plan to upgrade and modernize its roadway systems to support an urban approach to town and city planning. This was to take place over a 20-year period and was to be re-evaluated in internals over that time.

Here are a few comments from that 1960 report:

  • “The Town’s problem is to develop from its ancient, horse-and-buggy road pattern a modern circulation system to supplement the State Highway system, to adequately feed major traffic generators and to provide safe and convenient access throughout the Town.
  • “The proposed major and secondary thoroughofare system almost entirely makes use of existing roads. All of the secondary thoroughfares and almost all of the major thoroughfares which are Town roads require substantial improvement or complete reconstruction. Some 230 miles of secondary thoroughfares require reconstruction or substantial improvement”.
  • A minimum pavement width of 30 feet is recommended for all Town maintained major and secondary thoroughfares, and a 50 foot right of way will be satisfactory for secondary thoroughfares.
  • The plan recognized extension of the Sherwood Island Connector to Weston Road and the Merritt parkway interchange at Route #57.  From Westport’s point of view, construction of this highway is necessary to provide the Town with a badly needed north-south artery connecting the Parkway.   -  This badly needed connector never happened.

The fact is that this map represents a proposal and guide to roadway improvement not what existed at the time. It reflected an urban development philosophy now 40 years old, one that was never realized.   LETS LOOK AT A FEW OF THE INTERSTING PROPOSALS ON THE 1960 MAP:

  • The proposed Sherwood Island connector as mentioned which would tear its way through the heart of Westport.
  • A new proposed bridge at Clinton and Cavalry road.
  • A proposed new street off Compo Road North to feed to the town center.
  • A proposed new street at Peters Bridge heading west.
  • A new bridge to cross the Saugatuck at Sylvan Road to Imperial Avenue.
  • And the proposed modification and physical upgrade to numerous roadways including red coat lane, partrick, old hill and others that never took place.

 

It states in the 1960 report that Old Hill is a secondary street, and in keeping with that classifications and adjacency so was Partrick. This is also reflected in the 1987 roadway classification map. POINT OUT

For more than 4 decades no upgrades or road improvements have been made to Partrick Road, (according to Westport DPW town engineer Daniel Delehanty and Deputy Director John Broadbin), where the width averages 18-20’ wide, and at many points is only 16-17’ wide with numerous blind corners. This is grossly inadequate.

The Newtown Turnpike point of entry from the site is uphill and blind (even with modifications) and will be subject to numerous dangerous conditions.

Clealy in 1987 (and earlier) the shift was away from the urban model of town planning and to one of a more rural approach where we find ourselves today. As is the case in all developments, zoning regulations are designed to meet the maximum development conditions, and as such, roadway designation requirements specified for the OSRD zone and for this application must be sized to meet code and satisfy all major throughofare criteria.

8.                   

Clearly this proposal does not demonstrate that it meets the requirements of the OSRD zone, or that the site supports it.

 

Mark van Summern

277 Wilton Road

Westport, CT 06880