Design. Traffic. Parking.
Those concerns were raised again last night — as they have been for several months — as the Planning & Zoning Commission debated the Hamlet at Saugatuck proposal.
The long process is nearing an end, however. Commissioners meet again on July 21. A vote on the controversial retail/residential/hotel/event space project may come then, or the following week (July 28).
That vote may include outright acceptance or rejection, or approval with conditions.
As the meeting began, 3 commissioners — Michael Cammeyer, Neil Cohn and Breanne Injeski — indicated that they favor the Hamlet.
Four — chair Paul Lebowitz, and Michael Calise, Amy Wistreich and Patrizia Zucaro — said they are opposed.
Artist’s rendering of the Hamlet at Saugatuck project.
The work session was to determine whether developers ROAN Ventures comply with a text amendment, created in 2022 to allow a development like this. Cohn said that it does.
But Wistreich and others cited ongoing concerns, in several areas.
Zucaro spent over 3 hours offering a detailed analysis of how the project does not comply with the text amendment, such as “water dependent uses” (including stormwater management, public access and waterfront parking), along with traffic flow in the area.
Other traffic issues revolved around employee parking, stacked valet parking, and a proposed roundabout.
Traffic plans, submitted by ROAN Ventures.
In terms of density, Cohn noted that the height of the buildings is allowed by the text amendment. Wistreich called it an “urban design.” Cammeyere countered that multiple elements make up a small-town feel, beyond the size of a building.
Cohn reiterated his belief that — because the Hamlet plan complies with the text amendment — the commission cannot reject it.
Cammeyer added that ROAN has done a good job with the environmental aspect — and that the P&Z’s professional staff agrees that it complies.
The 65-day window for a decision continues to tick down.
(Reporting by Catie Campagnino)
If you love Stamford you should love this project.
Hi Bruce,
FYI – I love Stamford (I met my wife there in ‘86 and both our boys were born in Stamford Hospital) but I DONT love this project. I think a very timely and relevant question would be: What would Bruce Beinfield have done if he had been the designer instead of the current clowns?
We interviewed Bruce Beinfield to do the TOD study about 10 years ago (he was not successful). I remember him stating that he loved Saugatuck and the “grittiness” of it. He wanted to “improve it ” and blend the old with the new to keep the uniqueness.
Thanks for adding the context I was seeking. I’m still sad about losing my classmate Bruce. It’s been a long time since I lived in Westport but I’m glad Bruce took a look at the project. He would’ve done a great job with it. Maybe his surviving partners might want to take another shot.
Well luckily for the commissioners who are listening to the residents and who understand the text amendment as pointed out so well by commissioner Zucaro, the plan does NOT comply with the ludicrously generous text amendment passed for some ungodly reason, and therefore the 4 commissioners who are inclined to say NO, are entirely correct.
There must be zero CONDITIONS.
Why should there be !
They cannot be trusted.
There is no marina.
There is no staff parking.
The affordable housing is TBD.
The parking garages are a BYPASS operation.
They plan on (imho) using them as a pass through and there will be 10 valets moving out 12 cars each every hour or more possibly.
Out into yours and my commuter parking.
Why ? Because THEY DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH PARKING.
This plan gets an F.
It is chaos in the making.
As for the 8-30g threat. Bring it on !
Nobody will rent or buy the units without guaranteed parking and plenty of it for their cars and visitors cars.
And as stated before and very clear in 8-30g regs. The market and affordable must be identical in spec. So no ghetto affordable units such as contractors try at the moment because OFFSITE, are not governed( how convenient) by the states rules.
And look out- these are not the only buildings covered under the text amendment, and even the ones not covered will absolutely win a law suit for the exact same treatment. Especially under 8-30g
So this is only the tip of the iceberg.
Anybody with a property down there is closely watching.
Rubbing their hands with glee. Waiting for current leases to expire.
Saugatuck is going to look like Shanghai.
.
The Saugatuck Village deserves the best in town planning and development that we can give it. The Hamlet is not it. It’s not for Westport. It’s not favored by most Westporters. In fact, opposition has been fierce and passionate.
The Planning and Zoning Commission has done a fantastic job in thoroughly examining The Hamlet application. Even still, there are enough unanswered questions, or unsatisfactory answers, to deny this application.
That there is non compliance in even the slightest manner with the applicant’s own text amendment is reason enough to deny.
Commissioner Wistreich got it right when she said at the top of the meeting that the applicant should have withdrawn and taken the time necessary to cure the many ills with their proposal: size, scope, architecture, traffic and parking, to name just a few. All of us should applaud Commissioner Zucarro for the deep dive on each and every potential non compliance in the regulation (which is faulty in and of itself).
The discretion given the PZC for special permitting can be exercised to the fullest.
The hardline advocacy and badgering by some commissioners is disconcerting. The fact that not a single minute was spent on how this application serves the affordable housing mandate is telling.
This proposal s a bad version of planning and development for the town of Westport.
The current bumper to bumper traffic patterns in Saugatuck on a daily basis…let alone when Waze diverts traffic from 95 here—-belies common sense that such a huge project wont make this situation dramatically worse.
Does anyone care about SAFETY in an area where pedestrians (including my friend) have been struck by cars near the bridge? how will all these cars and delivery trucks and hotel extravaganzas benefit locals and their quality of life??
For those of us who live near Saugatuck and already have to deal with the WAZE diversions from 95, the very thought of the Hamlet is scary. I assume the very vocal supporters among the powers that be have $$$ riding on it.
Hmm, so it is the official position of the Westport Democratic Party to support the Hamlet as currently proposed?
This was a party line vote.
How did the Westport Democrats seed conservation and sensible zoning/planning to the Westport GOP?
“cede” not seed
argh!
Mike, On local matters like this one, party affiliation usually is irrelevant and a distraction. And I believe Paul Lebowitz is a Democrat, so not so much a party line vote.
Regardless of political party, as long as there are people like Michael Calise on the scene, Westport has a very good chance of staving off these barbarians at the gate. I am grateful for his long term perspective, expertise and genuine love for this town.
Next Act: Expect to see town attorneys and the 1st and 2nd Selectwomen put their thumbs on the scale, privately and publicly, to coerce at least 1 commissioner into a change of heart.
Paul Lebowitz is listed as Unaffiliated on the town’s website.
Michael Calise is a Republican.
All 3 democrats voted to approve.
The First Selectwomen is a lame duck.
Party and politics definitely matter on this one.
Do the democrats ever play to win, or will they always be the Washington Generals?
correction/apologies… Ms. Wistreich is listed as a Democrat and voted against.
Mike, I get the hyper partisan spirit but I just don’t see that here, or in most major town issues.
John, this November the terms for all 3 Democrats on the P&Z expire, and there will be an election for First Selectperson.
Soon, lawn signs will pop-up all over town and both the Westport Democrats and Republicans will rent space, fill it with volunteers and solicit votes for their collection of candidates.
That’s not hyper partisanship, that’s just the calendar of events.
Normally, P&Z elections are bit opaque, since no one can comment on active or upcoming projects without jeopardizing their future ability to vote on those projects. The election for First Selectperson spices things up considerably. The candidates will be challenged to take a stand on all pressing issues facing the town. Party politics will very much come into play, especially if the tickets are not aligned on the big issues.
of course, that will happen. My point is that on a local level, I have not seen much difference in policy or priorities from the two parties on a local level. Heck, if Jen Tooker had the inclination and courage to denounce Trump, I might have voted for her.
On a separate election related point, does anyone else feel like their vote for the RTM really doesn’t matter? Do you feel “represented” by one of the 4 people who falls into the RTM seat in your district each year?
“Vote No One for RTM 2025” coming soon to a town near you!
Agreed. Six of nine districts were uncontested in the last election. That means the RTM will take anyone. Despite some great members with deep knowledge on zoning, finance, transportation, the environment, etc., there are plenty of grumpy bobbleheads who love a microphone and take the slot to do the bidding of their master (or mistress).
Amy Wistreich is a Democrat and the Dems are very lucky to have her in their court.
There are many reasons why this over the top, ugly, not needed and way too dense project should not happen and Ms. Zucarro articulated it beautifully. I fear that if this project were to come to fruition that none of the existing Saugatuck businesses from the VFW and Dunville’s all the way to RR Place won’t even survive the construction phase.
In addition to the fact that it looks like the city of Norwalk or Stamford, which is not what Westport is about at all.
These condescending replies that reference other cities/towns is so Westport. Tell us Wendy, what is Westport ‘about’? Please don’t say it’s a ‘New England’ town.
Leave your attitude in Westport next time you’re playing in Norwalk or Stamford.
Ugly? I think a large majority agree it might be over the top and way too dense (hopefully it gets scaled down) but surely you don’t think that what is being proposed is ugly in comparison to what is there now. What is planned would be a huge improvement aesthetically.
Greedy developers are hell-bent on destroying any semblance of charm left in our once pretty towns. Horrifying to see the plan for the recently vacated beautiful Bridgewater complex. What do the condo owners in the former Glendinning factory have to say? New Canaan has a monstrosity in the works, Darien a four story high cement bunker/garage across from the Sport Shop, and the Neilsen family has an equally hideous enormous plan which is a done deal. In my forty years here I have always avoided driving through town, Westport is even worse, any time of day!
While I am encouraged by the critical analysis and reasoned stances taken by Patrizia Zucaro, Michael Calise, Amy Wistreich and Paul Lebowitz, the fact is they are severely handcuffed by the text amendment passed by the previous P&Z Commission (led by Danielle Dobin) which dramatically increased the allowable density (including building height) that people now decry.
Even if the developer was to (again) decrease the density of the Hamlet project in an effort to address the concerns raised, it will still be too tall, too dense, too intense. Doesn’t mean these four commissioners should give up their push back – everything they can do to obtain some decrease in the density of the Hamlet is desirable – but the core problem is with the 2022 text amendment.
Those that oppose The Hamlet, as I do, have argued well against it based on the important considerations of the catastrophic effects it will have on traffic, parking, density, town character, etc. However, there is one other, crucial consideration regarding The Hamlet that hasn’t received the attention it should. This is whether it is a good business proposition in the first place. Fully half of what Roan proposes is an ultra-luxury, destination resort, despite whatever New Englandy, small-town architectural details it may be dressed with. The other major portion of their plan involves high-end, luxury housing with the requisite high-end shopping. Bear in the mind that this proposed resort hotel intended to lure the uber-wealthy will have on site none of the amenities that this group expects of their resorts—tennis, golf, other sports, spas, fancy pools etc. Instead, this destination resort will be bordered on two sides by a very busy train station and the large parking lot serving it, while hovering overhead is a major interstate highway overpass. Is such a concept a viable business idea? I most decidedly believe it is not. One developer I’ve heard about this believes it makes no economic sense, and I haven’t heard from any real estate professionals who think this is good idea. And if The Hamlet is built and fails, then what? Roan files for bankruptcy, and what are we left with? Instead, let’s build something on a scale appropriate to what the Saugatuck area can sustain and not something that is the embodiment of the ambitions of a developer to serve a small, uber wealthy clientele.
Well said Robert.
I’m old enough to remember when this town couldn’t support a small and awesome boutique hotel (hello Inn at National Hall, ~10-15 rooms downtown overlooking the Saugatuck.) Now we are a tourist resort destination for people clamoring to spend $900 a night underneath I-95? This doesn’t add up.
Excellent point, IMO.
beautifully said!!!
A quick note to add my compliments to Michael Calise. Michael is a person of principle, knows Westport well and his votes usually reflect his sensitivity to the long term well being of Westport. I thank Michael often and now for his comments on the Hamlet.
Question: if Westport votes no to the Hamlet, does that mean we will end up with a huge affordable housing complex then?
Nobody knows until someone comes along, buys the properties, puts forward a plan, gets investors, wins an appeal if denied,
gets the state’s seal of approval, and meets all the state’s applicable housing, environmental, coastal management, DEEP, TOD, etc requirements.
So, I have no idea if this developer will come through with their threat, or another developer shows up with a different idea altogether, or the present property owners just hunker down. No one knows.
An 8-30g appeal is not a slam dunk, btw.
https://pschousing.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Understanding-The-Affordable-Housing-Land-Use-Appeals-Act.pdf
Thank you for that excellent link Toni.
Affordable housing is by no stretch of the imagination a slam dunk.
In fact highly unlikely that the buildings they proposed which looked like a prison, in order to instill fear, would ever be permitted.
But it does go to show their lack of respect for Westport residents with bully boy tactics.
They would still have the enormous parking challenge.
Commuters of Westport and surrounding towns will not sit idly by and watch a developer take their metro north commuter parking for themselves.
Nobody’s buying or renting an apt that has no GARANTEE of parking.
So good luck to anyone who tries to build an 8-30g down there.
To paraphrase the late Don Imus: “please, just go away”
I am reading a lot of chest thumping, name calling and the usual descent into partisan politics on this thread. But I don’t read an answer here to Beth’s question:
“If Westport votes no to the Hamlet, does that mean we will end up with a huge affordable housing complex then?”
We’d all like Westport to stay the way it is, party affiliation notwithstanding. This 830-g legislation isn’t going away because we don’t like it. It looks good to take a “bold stance” against this project. But what will we wind up with here? And who among our commenters will take responsibility for a 500 unit housing development should that come to pass?
Please answer that question and not just repeat what we don’t like about the Hamlet. We all don’t like it. Now what? Can anyone site a CT town fighting an 830-g project and winning?
You want an answer to Beth’s question? I don’t know, that’s my answer. And neither does anyone else.
But not sure how one effectively markets and profits from the ridiculous straw man they have put forward to scare the town into submission (350 market rate units and 150 affordable units with no open areas built on an unremediated toxic waste site.)
I like the housing project because it will add cultural diversity to our town. My theory is that the magic of Westport stems from the fact that it is for the kids. 500 more kids growing up, learning and loving in the beautiful and mysteriously magical place we call home. Westport was even better when people were more down to earth, that was part of the magic, and im sorry to say it is lacking somewhat now, because of its elevated status. Hamlet will only make it much worse–culturally.
We could cover our obligations with the state in one swoop.
And at the same time raise our children with less rich pretentious folk, regular people. A great thing culturally for us, would be to embrace the 500 units and toss out the ugly monster. After which we would never be subject to manipulations by greedy developers again.
I feel very strongly that growing up with havin lots of money as a central theme is not healthy for children. On the other side of the tracks are people just as real, if not more so.
Good god man! Read Dostoyevzki and Solzhenitsyn…
so does Roan / its investors own the land parcels today or have they merely negotiated an option to purchase? looking at the property ownership seems like no ownership has changed hands. anyone have any inside info? curious if the option to purchase expires soon. maybe the delay game is the way to go. let it get tied up in the courts for a bit. let the town try eminent domain. etc.
While the current and undeniably unpopular hamlet design might “mostly” meet the text amendment regulations, it does not, without conditions being applied/allowed.
We all know from experience conditions DO NOT WORK. And must not to be allowed.
They are abused and ignored.
While they ( conditions) would appear to be there to satisfy our major concerns, history would show that they amount to NOTHING. They are just there to try and pass this, and make the inevitable law suit more difficult.
Conditions are merely Empty promises which get brushed under the rug later, with an “oh well, too late” attitude.
I was proud to read of the commissioners who tended, in the straw poll to be leaning against this.
I only pray that the town attorney, selectmen, and those commissioners, townie investors, who so doggedly want this awful project to pass, for whatever reason, do not manage to needle anyone into changing their point of view.
There is zero doubt that the overwhelming voting population of this town is a vehement NO, to hamlet. Therefore the 4 commissioners who voiced concerns were representing the views of the vocal majority.
We are just over 3 months from town elections.
Another text ammendment change brought before the commission last week, which got continued, was in a nut shell a pro developer profit, and very anti onsite affordable housing sweeping change which the same 3 pro hamlet commissioners were enthusiastically in favour of.
Shocking to be honest.
It’s a completely unnecessary text amendment benefiting ONLY developers greed, and tying the hands of PZ just like the Hamlet has done.
Makes zero sense to even consider passing it.
It would be a gift to developers.
REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER WHO REPRESENTED YOUR VIEWS.
My former neighbor Ken Stamm asked a while back – if we don’t want this type of development, who do we vote for? John McCarthy argues that political party doesn’t matter in Westport politics. And this isn’t some situation where the First Selectperson comes in over the top with a tie breaking vote.
So I get the whole “remember in November” stuff, but I’m not sure this is one team against another. If it is, and the “Dems” voted in favor, I guess you’re suggesting to vote “Rep”?
Maybe each candidate for P&Z should publicly state their view on development, and then just like Supreme Court justices, do whatever they please once elected.
Westporters used to insist on candidates taking positions on vital issues… and many elections were not only decided on those stands, but by and large Westport became a better place for not only the effect of those stands but for honesty, transparency, and integrity.
Now with a couple of years of experiencing community-wrecking, grueling and painful issues such as Hiawatha Lane, Lincoln Ave, the loss of pockets of green space, the Community Gardens, The Hamlet, The William F Cribari Bridge… maybe it’s time for candidates to speak forthrightly to these and similar issues or for voters to hold their feet to the fire (figuratively, of course).
New Canaan fought an 8-30g appeal recently and lost. The article below was published two days ago:
https://newcanaanite.com/affordable-housing-judge-upholds-developers-appeal-in-complex-at-weed-and-elm-12847931
The reality of 8-30g is it will come with either a denial or an approval of the Hamlet. If approved, any number of lots abutting the Hamlet could still apply for an 830-g development (even potentially the Riko’s Pizza lot).
The fact is that Westport needs an affordable housing plan that adds affordable housing inventory for our teachers, fire fighters, police and seniors. This would allow us to stop the onslaught of threats from developers who are building massive complexes motivated by greed and doing little, if nothing for affordable housing. The Hamlet adds density without any leverage.
Driving on US-1 on my way to Trader Joe, I once again noticed to monstrosity being built down the hill from Kings Highway Elementary School. It has 54 units. Now I picture a monstrosity 6 or 10 times larger built on my beautiful Saugatuck neighborhood. It makes me sad. I live just a five minute walk to the train station. Much of that walk is through the ugliest part of town. When I see the renderings of the proposed Hamlet, I smile. I want to walk through the streets and alleys of The Hamlet on my way to the train station and when I choose to dine at one of the many restaurants in the area. To me, it is a no brainer decision. I urge the members of P & Z to vote YES so this project can get underway.
Mr. Dodig..You’ve got some stones. That “ugliest part of town” is home to 20 plus restaurants, many other businesses and offices, a working marina, a RR station and the residences of many good people. Perhaps just close your eyes on your next walk.
Mr. Dodig, you are being played by con artists.
You get to walk, try driving to the train everyday for decades. Think in terms of utility for the people who work everyday. Its not about taking a pretty walk, its about monsterous traffic jams and having a functioning transportation hub.
I should have been clearer. I was referring to the ugly parts of Saugatuck like that horrible concrete office building, the brick building housing a locksmith, the dry cleaning establishment, then around the corner to Tsilroad place. The rest is beautiful. I love Railroad Place and all the buildings Gault built. The Hamlet would just complete beautiful Saugatuck
My dad took train to Manhattan everyday, two or three times a week we went in to the cleaners to drop off and pick up.
But I hear you, its a bit run down. Saugatuck is like a big parking lot because the train is so important to people who live here and work in New York. We even had a station car, a car just to leave at the station.
And obviously with Mario’s gone we are reminded that times change.
And obviously I have great respect for your service to Westport!
The boathouse
The bridge at Saugatuck
Viva zapata
Rizuttos
Lobster shack
Renatos
Kawani
Rainbow Thai
The whelk
Match burger
Kneads
Tuttis
Rikos
Zucca
Tarantinos
Harvest
Romanaccis
Allium
Dunvilles little pub
Four brothers
Lomito
Dunkin’ Donuts
The black duck
Momu( ice cream)
23 restaurants/bars/cafes…… doesn’t matter how you try and “slice” this.
The area does not need 1 singular extra restaurant.
It’s a full scale takeover. A hostile takeover.
Some on this list have been in service for more than 50 years.
These existing businesses should have been factored in when the text amendment was written and passed but most certainly were not even given a thought. Never mind a plan.
If anyone thinks the Hamlet is not going to effect these businesses they have another thing coming.
There only so much parking to go around, and last I checked couples do not ride 6 to a car.
The Hamlet does not work in Saugatuck.
It is over 2x too big and while mixed use might be attractive, the mixed use should be 60-70% less. They can do that by using the ground floor for parking in several buildings, instead of for shops and restaurants.
The affordable housing should be onsite, and of the exact same standard as the market rate units.
Then remove the top floor on each of the tallest buildings.
The event space should be gone. It’s ridiculous. It’s no more for the community than the man in the moon. It’s to attract people to their Disney world elitist destination to spend money. That’s all.
We don’t need an event space there. It’s just more profiteering.
And anyone who believes this is all that will be built down there is living on another planet.
Eventually every property owner in that ZONE, will be building apts.
why would they not ?
Saugatuck will look like the projects full of tall inappropriate buildings.
Forget about the monumental devastation of existing businesses because of 3 years of construction followed by phase 2 adding to that 3 year construction, when property owners realise they can take a 2 story and make it a 5/6/7/8, they will wait for existing leases to expire and with zero doubt they will build apts.
Hamlet does not work.
And not one single solitary condition should be given to approve this.
Backpedaling!!! (like most school administrators do when they find themselves under the gun – just ask Mr. Scarice).
Back in its day, that “horrible concrete office building” was considered a triumph of mid-century modern architecture. As
Westporters from the Greatest Generation (our parents) used to say: “Use it up, wear it out, make it do or do without.” Maybe the status quo might be the best option until Westport figures out how to cope with TDS (Tooker Derangement Syndrome).
“To be or not to be, that is the question.”
Where did that quote come from? (Wait for it!!!! Wait for it!!!!) HAMLET!!!!! (The one in Shakespeare, not the one in Saugatuck)