“06880” intern Katherine Phelps reports:
The development team behind The Hamlet at Saugatuck returned again last night to the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Once again, they presented a revised proposal, intended to address concerns raised during earlier public hearings.
More than 90 people attended the Zoom meeting, which lasted over 3 1/2 hours.
The ROAN Ventures team showed updates to the plan. Commissioners offered measured feedback, and residents continued to question the retail/residential/ hotel/marina project’s scale, traffic impact and long-term implications.
One of the biggest changes is the removal of the previously proposed tunnel under Railroad Place. Project architect Joe Barbagallo noted that the design now complies with setback rules.
The “J Building” is rotated 45 degrees on the site, while the “Barn Building” is cut back on its west side, creating a 40-foot buffer from the property line.
The waterfront area also underwent changes. The development team reduced the building’s massing, and adjusted architectural details to preserve view corridors and improve public gathering spaces.
Engineer Andy Soumelidis said the revised “Residential D” building now sits behind the required 10-foot border. He also highlighted an upgraded stormwater management system that captures 1.3 inches of runoff, exceeding Westport’s minimum standard.
Urban planner Marina Khoury outlined operational improvements, including package delivery rooms, garbage pickup routes, and 2 separate loading docks — one serving the Barn, another near the waterfront. She referenced similar design principles used in projects like Friday Harbor in Ontario and The Wharf in Washington, emphasizing walkability and loading efficiency.
Commissioners offered varied reactions. Chair Paul Lebowitz called the increased setbacks “a big improvement,” but expressed concern over the loss of buildings on Railroad Place. He said he wishesd the changes had been presented earlier.
Michael Calise challenged claims that traffic near Franklin Street improves under the new plan. He noted that the team provided no data to support that assumption, and continued to question their traffic projections.
Patrizia Zucaro asked whether parking has changed — it has not — and whether a management company will coordinate deliveries. ROAN replied that on-site property managers and valet operators will handle logistics.
Commissioners questioned whether or not that can truly be enforced.
Public comments reflected continued division as well.
Attorney Joel Green, representing the Westport Alliance for Saugatuck, said that no updated documents have been formally submitted and that the public still lacks a clear understanding of the final proposal.
Residents Linda Prestegaard and Carole Reichhelm voiced concerns about parking, especially for employees.
Michele Pickett questioned the loading zones, and asked how events with over 300 attendees might be handled during rush hour.
Dara Lamb asked for a scale model or elevation views, to visualize how the riverfront will look from different vantage points.
Chris Tait, a Representative Town Meeting member whose district includes Saugatuck, asked whether a traffic study will be available before the June 16 meeting.
Kevin McGrath and other residents acknowledged that while no development is perfect, the developers are making an effort to engage with the community, and incorporate feedback.
Commissioner Amy Wistreich closed the meeting by saying she will not vote on the project without seeing complete documents, including traffic, safety and stormwater reports.
ROAN said they expect all materials to be submitted by early tomorrow (Wednesday), at the latest.
The next P&Z hearing is scheduled for June 11. A possible vote is now expected on June 16.
We recently moved back to Westport and realize looking at the Hamlet plan and all the town departments, boards and commissions involved that the missing link to
Residents update may be the former League of Women Voters
wonderful Observer Corps, which for years was chaired by the late Ann Gill and knowledgeable Observers. A great loss for Westport.
Carol Waxman
Carol, great point. I would also add that a rubber-stamp RTM is also to blame for what appears to be an out of control town and leaderless town government. There is no longer a townwide body which can be counted on to be the conscience of the town, a body which “represents” the diverse opionions and viewpoints of those of us who live in town. The RTM was originally designed to be a place where difficult and contentious issues could be openly discussed, without a pre-determined answer. It has now devolved into a Stay-In-Your-Lane-And-Shuttup entity. Quite sad. Why does it still exist?
The Hamlet is a overloaded jumbo jet with 3 of 4 engines flamed trying to make an emergency landing on a football field! This is a disaster at the start and it’s down the crammed roads at it’s end in Saugatuck’s future.
This project is an over-development for the location. Traffic today is out of control and has been for some time. It is so bad that I wrote the First Select Woman a two page letter suggesting some changes to moderate the problem but none were implemented. To then propose to add this project to the traffic mix will only make a bad situation even worse. This area gets flooded with cars whenever there is any type of issue on I95 and that happens frequently.
Paul Lebowitz’s question on the loss of the historic buildings on RR Place was dead on. Why in the world is Roan choosing now to destroy what the P&Z asked to be preserved during the original Text hearings and is clearly and unambiguously in the Text itself?
At issue are the 1849 original post office (Steam Coffee) and the 1850s building right next to it. In their original plans they heralded that they were to be saved and spruced up in keeping with the wonderful character of our historic RR streetscape. Now, because a commissioner pressed back on unneeded encroachment on setbacks elsewhere, Roan is taking the opportunity to build bigger. Choosing new instead of preservation.
This is a breach of the public trust and a reneg on their assurances that RR Place would remain intact. This makes no sense and is a mistake that should be walked back immediately.
Matt, the minimal setback waivers in exchange for height reduction and more public space were revoked at the last minute by P+Z.
We put substantial effort into securing those to maintain height limitations, and you were supportive during that process. Should I link the recorded meeting with your comments to refresh your memory? What has changed? Perhaps there’s a shift in strategy now with Hartford on the horizon? that’s the breach and reneging, so please.
Robbie, not sure why you would not support historic preservation, especially when it was initially offered. Setbacks have nothing to do with this, accept they were linked last night. The historic buildings are pre-existing non-conforming (grandfathered) and are allowed in the setback. So what’s the rub? Preserve the buildings and the streetscape and build up behind them as allowed via the zone.
Excellent point, Matt. Those historic structures, including the former post office, are listed on Westport’s Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) – our town’s official database of important historic buildings. The HRI is a critical, publicly available planning tool, established and maintained via federal pass thru dollars. It”s unfortunate that ROAN seems to have possibly overlooked it.
An 1849 building ?The Post Office, which is listed in historical register needs to be preserved.
It adhered to all the setbacks for its time .
It’s part of our town’s history.
New buildings and structures , such as you propose. need to meet today’s standards.
It’s happening right now. I-95 south is shut down due to an accident. Cars are streaming down Green Farms Road , including trucks, all heading for Saugutuck. Saugutuck is not passable right now. Plus there is construction at the station.
There has been so much time spent on everything but the single most important issue.
Traffic and parking. Everybody knows traffic studies are a joke,
made as instructed.
I listened to the zoom call last night, did not see any charts
or graphs on how many spots are being estimated
for retail customers ,restaurant customers, hotel guests,
residences of the condos/apartments, boaters,
etc.
How many spots are estimated for employees?
After this is actually answered, how many spaces are in the garage.
Many Friday nights i meet friends for dinner at Railroad Place
around 7 PM.
Parking is non-existent. The commuter lot is full.
So before we have any conversations about anything else,
how about Roan put in writing the answers for above.
This project is not for the people who reside in Westport.
Barry thank you !
Another person who really understands that the math simply does not add up.
And let’s not forget that the properties to be built upon are currently being used for parking.
So we are negative about 200 parking spaces in the area once this construction is completed and Hamlets gargantuan monstrosities are built on top of that parking.
So in effect they are adding 77 parking spaces.
This has been mentioned but conveniently never really expanded upon.
Anybody who says companies plan on allowing their employees work remotely are delusional..
The post covid re uptake of train riders, who are commuting is very clear. More and more every month.
And we share the railroad with many towns.
Weston, Easton, Wilton, Norwalk, Fairfield commuters should also be eying this with fear and trepidation.
The project is NOT for the people of Westport.
However, we were supposed to be “razzle-dazzled” by the various supersized developments around the world. What a time-wasting distraction when real questions about traffic, parking, environment, police and fire safety, and density are unanswered.
Further, while everyone else is celebrating the “responsive” revisions (done under duress), I view many of at the changes as a poke in the eye:
— ditching the tunnel because the state wouldn’t approve it;
— complying with setbacks in place of promised historic preservation;
— architecture changes in place of density;
— new loading dock by overtaking public parking.
These changes were somewhat retributive from where I sit. I could be wrong but still, where is the traffic study and police and fire report?
There’s also construction currently on Riverside avenue – for what seems the 10th time in a couple years. Not sure how many more times they can cut huge channels in on this road before it just becomes a sink hole.
I don’t know if the landowner of the remaining places on railroad place will ever sell to roan, but I have no doubt that they could and if they were to what roan is proposing to do at the old post office and the 1850 building beside it will face the same fate undoubtedly.
This project is about obscene greed, but then it has been since they, the hamlet, in my opinion guided the town on what to change in the text ammendment.
Basically the Text ammendment was their wish list and they showed far less density back then in pictures to get it passed.. it was unattractive then tho better than it is now.
To state they have scaled back is misleading.
They are simply buying fewer properties and cramming almost as much onto those.
Their stacker systems and no doubt tight parking garages and tight parking spaces, all underground will be an absolute cluster !
And I will repeat a few “warnings” about their likely way of coping with the 277 spaces for 2000 cars( not people) of course only my opinion.
They will empty their garages out into commuter parking any opportunity they get in order to take commuter spots from commuters in the early morning and keep their garages ready to accept cars ! They don’t need permits to park in the very affordable paid parking.
Not sure why nobody else is focused on this.
It is very probable that during the day as spaces open up in the railroad lots, hamlet or whatever brand it is flipped to will use their valets to commandeer those spaces.
Under the current railroad contract there is nothing to stop them from doing that.
It will be incumbent on the commuters who use railroad parking to go to CTDOT as a large group and change the wording of that contract, and to at all costs safeguard against such behaviour , including ( depending upon who the next select person is – acting as the traffic and parking authority) language which does not allow a hamlet sympathetic selectman, to favor hamlet or new brand over commuters.
In order to be successful and draw businesses who will lease their 40 retail spaces( including likely 12 new restaurants) those businesses will need to be frequented 7 days a week.
They need 2000 parking spaces minimum.
I have no doubt they plan on going after lot 7 again likely once more behind our backs as happened 2 years ago, as let’s not forget for 2 years before hamlet was ever made public, several RTM, and other town administration, undoubtedly town hall, and police department, acting as railroad parking administrators were fine tuning what it was going to take to make the text ammendment work, with giveaways such as an FAR OF 1000-1 ( or 1300-1) meaning parking was screwed from the getgo.
This was done through an absolute lack of transparency and then presented to the public, most of who hated it as much then and way more now, and then 33 RTM irresponsibly voted to not overturn it, even though clearly a majority of the public who live in this town were vocally against it.
Just INCREDIBLE.
There’s no 8-30g coming for this project. They will not pay the property owners what they are asking.
Then there’s the question conveniently still out there.
Phase 2? Phase 3?
A possible full takeover of saugatuck by avaricious investors.
They get phase 1, you know phase 2 and 3 are coming.
Where’s the marina ? Where’s the solid permission/permit from DEEP, to construct it ?
There’s none ! That could be never or 30 years from now.
Where’s the plan for offsite affordable housing ? No doubt that will be thrown up on Franklin with no parking,causing Franklin residents an insane headache as people battle for on street spaces, and the units will not be comparable in size and quality to the expensive apartments, I wonder are they being told to build a 4 bedroom equal to the penthouse in their development.
I suggest since PZ allowed for offsite they ask for the plans for this NOW !!!!
I for one want to see where it is going and what it will look like, how tall it will be, and how much existing parking will be removed to build it.
It is very much a part of this phase, yet they are being given a pass by PZ !
Show the public, the planned build for it and let us insure that an appropriate number of 2,3,4 bedroom units are being accounted for which are of similiar size to same expensive onsite units.
This MUST not be forgotten in the stampede, or time crunch.
Has anybody checked to make sure the state will give us full points towards a moritorium? If points are not the max we risk being negative on the 15 units, because we are adding more than 50 units to our housing stock.
I do know the state frowns upon offsite, and still has state rules ( not town rules) as to size being comparable to one of the fancy units with the same number of bedrooms.
Just because contractors have been allowed( they should not have been) to shove offsite, any old place, not remotely comparable to units in their developments does not mean that this practice need be permitted by Roan. Though Roan, likes to point out for example loading zones all over town, which are not adequate, and say they are just doing the same thing. This should and must not apply to the affordable housing.
So I want to know where the offsite affordable is going and that it is similiar size to the onsite units.
I suggest it should be a % of spend.
So if 50 units are being built and 15 are permitted offsite, then that’s 30%. If the 50 units cost $1 million to build, then $15 million must be set aside for the affordable component.
That should be the cost/benefit of offsite to the developer.
It should not be a financial coup !
Ms Webster,
Most is just your opinion at best.
Your statement about the viability of 8-30g is completely wrong.
#1 none of ROAN’s investors will stand to lose any invested funds.
830-g is actually more profitable that the hamlet. As most of ROAN’s investors are Westport residents we all prefer the Hamlet .notwithstanding, 830g is real!
State of ct does not require remediation of the contaminated soil.
And, there would be zero waterfront development, no board walk no marina.
It will be big and ugly and your fault.
This is privately owned property
Too many untrue statements coming from you.
Mr. Cohen,
it is already big and ugly.
I guess that is your fault by your very thought process.
I don’t dispute that it is private property.
I’ve now spoken with 4, 8-30g contractors and anything down there now( with that text amendment ) will never be an 8-30g.
But back to what is on the table now.
I’d be very nervous if I were an investor.
Unless of course I were an investor where the plan is to flip it to a “brand”.
Approx 40 retail – 30% of those restaurant.
I believe 36 spaces of the 277 are for the retail.
Oh and 2 earmarked for the black duck staff and patrons.
Where are you envisioning 650 staff( could be 1000- holidays and summer( patio dining) to park ? There are not that many empty spaces at the train station today. I just drove past it. And greens farms from September to May is full now.
So kitchen staff arrive around 8. Retail staff at 10.
Many/ most/but not all commuters are parked by then.
I mean let’s do the math on patrons.
12 restaurants plus food court plus separate water front hotel and roof top bar.
Let’s say an average of 1200 patrons. ( and that’s low) At lunchtime during the work week, most of those are 1 to a car. Let’s just say 2 to a car.
600 parking spaces required.
Retail shops. Will we say 300 patrons ? That’s definitely 1 to a car.
900 spaces. Plus 650 staff.
1550 spaces required. That is the entirety of the railroad parking.
What about the 23 restaurants already in Saugatuck, most who do not have sufficient parking as it is and their staff and patrons spill over already into railroad parking when it is available.
Then the existing retail. And their staff and patrons.
We are heading towards a number of cars in the vicinity of 3000.
So can you explain to me your vision, how you think this works ?
How can it be profitable? If nobody can park.
And even if it’s a flip and initial investors don’t care what the end result is, you don’t think a “brand “ wont do their due diligence ?
As for the marina, it’s not on the plan. Has no permit and who knows if it will ever be built.
Throw in traffic and environmental, and I’d just love you to show me math that works.
My numbers above are not high. They are on the low side.
And please give me the rationale for no marina in this “phase”- meaning there are more phases to come.
And the rationale for not showing where the plan is for the affordable housing, and instead a tbd.
I can only assume that 1 year into the building of current phase 1 we will be all back looking at more phases.
I look forward to reading your answers. How you see this succeeding. And please, spare me the 8-30g cudgel and let’s focus on this plan before us.
Great point, Matthew. The Railroad Place stores and restaurants were the last vestige of any link to historical Saugatuck charm amid a colossal, slick overbuild proposed by Roan. I’ll be interested in ARB’s take on the latest re-design if they ever get a chance to chime in again. The new images Roan shared last night bear no resemblance to the New England coastal look stipulated in the text amendment. Bad design is bad design. We have a long way to go here.
Ironically the Saugatuck area’s best claim to a. New England coastal look is the William F. Cribari Bridge which the Roan developers want replaced.
Fake it ‘til you make it?
Admit it
The Hamlet is a disaster
Of course ROAN should be required to produce a scale model I dwl. How else can anyone see the full project in relation to the neighborhood.
someone please show proof of how traffic stays the same or improves… i am all ears…. who would want to open a business or visit a place where it is not possible to get in/out due to traffic… that goes for dining, hotel, etc…. i am worried that restaurants i frequent will become inaccessible or run out of the area… so far this project does not pass the sniff test for me… and all things point to a bigger traffic nightmare for the area than there already is. safety implications too (what if there is a fire, medical emergency, or crime that requires westport first responders to respond and the area is gridlocked)? will norwalk be picking up westport emergency calls for the part of saugatuck cut-off by traffic?
also wait until another truck hits the railroad bridge… at one point that was happening very frequently… maybe it still is… area is just not meant for more traffic…