The Fairfield Hills Master Plan Review Committee held a meeting on Thursday, August 12, 2010 at the Newtown Municipal Center, Newtown, Connecticut. Mr. Maurer called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
Present: Dennis Kyle, Paul Lundquist, Robert Maurer, Michael Mossbarger, Ben Roberts, Alan Shepard, Gary Steele, and Deborra Zukowski; Absent: Michael Floros, Nancy Roznicki, and Stephen Zvon
Public Participation: None.
Approval of Minutes: Mr. Steele motioned to approve the minutes of July 26th . The motion was seconded by Ms. Zukowski. The motion was approved unanimously.
Mr. Maurer passed around a list for members to sign-up for the subcommittees. The specifics about the subcommittees purposes and resources were reviewed. It was noted that the subcommittees will be reviewed and some may be combined for more effectiveness. This will be discussed at the next meeting.
Affordable Housing: Ms. Zukowski discussed a report completed by Kim Cadena, an intern that has been working on Affordable Housing guidelines and recommendations for the Town. Differences between the State and Town’s guidelines were discussed. The State suggests 10% of the Town have deed restricted affordable housing. The report identified two areas in Newtown where high density affordable housing would be suitable, one on the Route 6 corridor and the other at Fairfield Hills. There were other areas targeted for mid level affordable areas as well. She discussed the fact that the State will pay the Town approximately 5,000 to 7,000 dollars per unit as a one time benefit for each affordable housing unit. Ms. Zukowski felt it isn’t enough to abate the cost to the
Town. She felt if it was an unfunded mandate, where the units would be and impacts on schools and Town services would need to be reviewed. She suggested looking at future demographics and reviewing the Planimetrics report.
The committee discussed the income limits. Mr. Maurer felt the problem is not the cost of each unit, instead meeting the guidelines. Mr. Steele asked if the State is suggesting that affordable housing be newly built or use existing structures. Ms. Zukowski said that once you have buildings with unrestricted deeds, it’s difficult to place restrictions on them and doesn’t think that would work in a practical sense. Affordable housing would probably need to be newer or refurbished buildings.
Tour of Buildings: Mr. Maurer asked for feedback on the tour of the buildings. Mr. Steele said as a resident of 14 years, touring the buildings was an eye opening experience. He said the buildings and architecture were fascinating. He felt there was a lot of space and thought about the cost to destroy them and rebuild opposed to keeping them and maintaining the architectural excellence.
Mr. Shepard discussed this as well and said once evaluation of cost and income is complete the numbers will speak for themselves.
Mr. Lundquist said there should be a ball park sense of what’s realistic. He felt he was left with more questions than answers after the tour and was struck by the challenge to get a thumbnail. He said the committee would need to find out the potential of the buildings from an architect’s viewpoint without spending a lot of money. He said there’s a significant task to get the picture clarified.
Mr. Shepard said there have been specs completed with estimates on hazardous material removal. He felt gathering existing information, such as the final cost of the Municipal Center’s rehabilitation, is important.
Mr. Steele asked if there was information provided by developers that had reviewed Fairfield Hills several years ago. Mr. Lundquist said the condition of the buildings have changed since then so they may need to be relooked at. He felt the Municipal Center was not configured like the others and was more open. His general opinion is that the buildings have served their purpose and finds it difficult to imagine what would they be used for today and that the initial Master Plan called for them to be torn down in five years. He feels that it may be a reasonable solution, but reviewing the numbers and mechanics behind that decision is important.
Ms. Zukowski discussed Mr. Zvon take on the buildings and said he was impressed by the buildings structural integrity after he and Mr. Shepard inspected the basements. She said that Mr. Zvon said that removing interior walls would not be a problem since they are not structurally needed and that there was a lot that can be done with the buildings. She said that Mr. Zvon was talking about the bones of the building and that the foundation was exceptionally strong and that he had pointed out several unique architectural features. She doesn’t feel that value should be dismissed.
Mr. Maurer said Cochran was a hospital and it looks like a hospital, but he can visualize apartments being there especially with the removal of some walls. He said the building is in excellent condition. He said Canaan House surprised him the most because of the open areas. He said many corporations are requesting more open areas for their offices. He was impressed more by the buildings than he thought he would be.
Mr. Mossbarger feels the committee should find out what the community wants to do with the buildings first and he doesn’t understand why anyone would want it to remain looking like a mental hospital. He said if the community wants to save the buildings, then the committee can come back and see how to do it. He noted that there are more current buildings that are also beautiful. He was surprised that the Cochran house was proposed for apartments and felt Canaan house was in poor shape. He felt the committee should determine what to do with the property as a whole before individual buildings are delved into. Mr. Maurer agreed but said the intent of the committee is to look at everything and keep open to ideas.
Mr. Roberts said if the commission has informed conversations with the community and the government, it will succeed in it’s mission.
Mr. Mossbarger asked about the buildings that are being torn down. The commission discussed the CIP and the area where the Recreation Center will be built, the Park and Rec.’s garage across from Reed School, and the possible future site of the Police Station. Mr. Maurer distributed a building inventory. The CIP can be looked at in an advisory capacity.
Mr. Lundquist suggested everyone on the committee rotate to attend the Fairfield Hills Authority meetings and come back with reports. He then suggested all committee members pool questions that can be posed to the their board. Ms. Zukowski said there is a lot of history to provide to this commission.
Mr. Maurer said he and Mr. Floros discussed having George Benson, Bob Geckle, John Reed and Julia Wasserman to a meeting in September. Ms. Zukowski suggested also asking Lilla Dean. Mr. Mossbarger stated concerns about the timing and not having enough time to complete the process before December. Ms. Zukowski said that in speaking with Ms. Llodra, the commission should not be concerned over time pressures.
Mr. Kyle said that there should be specific questions posed to the Fairfield Hills Authority and feels there was a wasted money. He then discussed the asbestos abatement costs and possible soil contamination around the buildings. He said bricks were ground up for landfill and could have been recycled. He discussed the Town crews working at Fairfield Hills. It was noted that for the CIP, the Fairfield Hills Authority asked for $30 million dollars more. There was $22 million spent and that work done by the Highway Department cannot be quantified. There was also an additional $3.5 million for the parking lot. The roads within Fairfield Hills being renamed and changed to Town roads was also discussed.
The committee then talked about parcels noted within the Master Plan. It will be discussed further in more detail at a later date.
Ms. Maurer motioned to adjourn the meeting at 8:11 pm. Motion seconded by Mr. Lundquist. Motion approved unanimously.
The next meeting will be held in the Council Chambers on Monday, August 23, 2010 at 7:00 pm.
| 
