.

Your Take: New Housing Development Proposal for Strong Street

Many East Haven residents are voicing their concern about a developer's 105-unit proposal for mixed income housing along Strong Street. What's your take?

A developer's proposal to build more than 100 units of mixed income housing along Strong Street in East Haven has many residents raising concerns about the project's possible effects on the neighborhood's housing prices and quality of life.

The proposed plan — submitted to the town by Autumn View LLC — is calling for 105 units on the site, which if approved would be built along Strong Street across from Erico Drive.

The developer is also seeking a zone change for a 17 acre parcel: from R-3 and PEFD Zone to Mixed Income Housing District, according to notice of public hearing for the project. (a site plan and the notice are both attached to this post)

The public hearing for the proposed plan was held on Feb. 6. Residents have reported to East Haven Patch that it was a full house at the Senior Center that night, with most in attendance not in favor of the project.

of the proposal in he lastest post — arguing that if approved, the development would have negative impacts on the school system, the safety of residents, Grannis lake, traffic, pollution, noise, and enviroment, among other things.

So, what's your take on the Strong Street proposal? Would the project, if approved, be an overall benefit to the town? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Flowers February 20, 2013 at 05:12 PM
This area was zoned the way it was for a reason. It shouldn't be changed just because someone asks. Besides, the attached plan makes the development look like a little ghetto.
Beth February 20, 2013 at 05:15 PM
Speedy reporting by the Patch....the meeting was almost 2 weeks ago.
bibledoctor02 February 20, 2013 at 05:26 PM
restless is godless. as the apostle Paul said do not be yoked with unbelievers[ children of belial] if your a bible toting christian like i am look elsewhere. human noise is the most repulsive. selah
Julie Weisberg (Editor) February 20, 2013 at 05:42 PM
Beth: I agree a post published prior to the public hearing would have been more timely. But I hadn't yet seen anything published on the proposal elsewhere, so I wanted to make sure I got something up now to allow residents to discuss the project. Just an FYI.
Sally Kik February 20, 2013 at 05:55 PM
It isn't going to happen so everyone calm down. The developer, that I know personally, would'nt want something like this in or around his neighborhood, it would only be bad karma for him, and he knows that, he likes to get people in a tizzy, and he is succeeding. No worries, if everyone wants to stay at their position in the town, they will do the right thing, because as quick as they got in is as quick as they will be out!
Steohen Haddon February 20, 2013 at 06:05 PM
purchase the land yourself ??????? can you get any more impractical The protection in the plan of development stops this like it stopped the Veterans housing scam on Rt 80 NO candidate will support this so the whoring is off the table However, I'd like to take this opportunity to invite readers to check out who was chairing the zoning board when the Hubinger property was developed, forever removing it as a recreational resource to townspeople, and who proposed to buy it for the town. The historical society keeps such things on record. That's where I read it.
AK-47 February 20, 2013 at 06:49 PM
The developer lives in North Branford, not the Foxon area, and not East Haven. Also, this developer has hired a high-powered attorney out of NY and rumor has it has invested over $100,000 in legal fees to sue the town once this gets rejected. Also, during the meeting on February 6th the developer had an entourage with consultants covering every detail, down to the types of trees that will be planted. Sally, this is quite an expensive bluff don't you think?
Bob Fawkes February 20, 2013 at 07:30 PM
Comrade capitalists, Money talks. BS walks. The town is not in a position to defend against a well organized developer with money backing him up. Tax revenue is required to feed the insatiable bureaucratic beast. This year or next, this development WILL happen. Deal with it. Welcome your new neighbors or move out now. The choice is yours.
Kim M February 20, 2013 at 08:29 PM
I don't think this would benefit East Haven AT ALL. I am not sure where they will fit students in the already over crowded schools. The streets in that area are not meant to support that kind of traffic. I grew up on Strong Street 30 years ago. What was once a quaint cozy neighborhood where I would safely ride my bike, is now a race track cut through. And those with half-million dollar houses up the road, kiss your property value goodbye! I think this is a horrendous idea, put together by a greedy developer. Thanks for trying to ruin the town (even more) by building some unwelcome 'projects'.
AK-47 February 20, 2013 at 09:13 PM
Couldn't agree more, nicely said!
Steohen Haddon February 20, 2013 at 09:19 PM
small old school thinking....do i have to teach you everything Chicken Little Agreed, every single family home developed is an arrow in the town budget, a development like this is a dagger but the blind squirrel did find a nut when he typed "Tax revenue is required" So, why not advocate for the town to apply for open space grant money when available to buy undeveloped parcels where development would put the town "at risk" This is also one of the few cases where I would even advocate bonding for the money. Then, have a plan of development registered with the state, manage your housing stock, improve your school system, focus on redeveloping parcels to maximize their taxable potential, develop currently available parcels as revenue producers, avoid "super-zoning", and adopt the high assessment / low mill rate models of the other shoreline towns.....for a start
dino martino February 20, 2013 at 11:31 PM
My segment was just for awareness to what happened at the meeting that is all,not for political reasons but for whats right for the neighborhood and the town.Your comments are ridiculous if not absurd...Buy the property? Really,,,Do you even live in East Haven?...Overdeveloping any neighborhood for financial gain especially with so many issues and unanswered questions is a terrible idea no matter how you spin it
dino martino February 20, 2013 at 11:42 PM
Julie, There really wasn't a lot of time to comment..the letters only came a week before the public hearing and most residents in the area were unaware..supposedly 500 letters went out..as stated at the public hearing,which I doubt, most residents did not receive a letter..even the town zoning stated he didn't know anything until a week before the meeting and found out through the fire department. The decision has not been made but word is the decision will be made March 6.
cirrus February 21, 2013 at 01:21 AM
hey bibledoc do you follow these laws: Leviticus 11:7-8 Leviticus 19:28 - that one i would bet you follow Leviticus 19:27 Deuteronomy 23:1 Leviticus 19:16 Deuteronomy 25:11-12 Exodus 21:17 Mark 10:11-12 Exodus 31:14-15 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Leviticus 10-11 Deuteronomy 22:20-21 just to name a few.. if so then you are perfect.. Reply
Sam Giglio February 21, 2013 at 11:32 AM
It seams like a great parcel of land to build a more scale down project, Maybe cluster one family homes for 55 and older. Have a common maintenance plan for landscaping and upkeep, This would be less of an impact to the local residents and no impact to the School system. But could generate Tax Dollars for the Town
dino martino February 21, 2013 at 12:37 PM
Bravo Sam.....Now that Would actually benefit the community...Lets hope this developer comes to his senses,and does the right thing here...he was approved already for 50 homes for this purpose...But there are still many issues that needed to be addressed and don't understand how they were overlooked
ASmith February 21, 2013 at 12:49 PM
Jacobo if my memory serves me right didnt Mr. Art the mayor jokes right hand man work for this Nafis & Young after the joke left office in 2007? I thoughts I recall readin that somewhere?
Bob Fawkes February 21, 2013 at 01:49 PM
Yes Smitty, yes I think Mr. Art did "work" for Nafis & Young at one time or another. If Nafis & Young are involved in this landgrab, all of these folks up in arms about it ought not count on the Marblemouth coming to their rescue any time soon.
Richard Poulton February 23, 2013 at 12:53 AM
So what. The engineering firm you are referring to has no financial interest in this developemnt other then doing the engineering required for such a project. Thats what they do for a living. Now, if you are interested, the property is owned by Statewide Construction out of North Branford. Take your political head out of the sand. Secondly, back in 2007, the area was approved by all for a smaller developement and I believe required a zoning change then, but I maybe wrong on that. But, now the developer wants to change everything, amount of dwellings, etc... and a new zone just for them. I say go back to what you were first approved for and build it. Going to miss out on some profit, sell the property. Your approved permit for the first project is good till 2021, plenty of time. Start building.
Steohen Haddon February 23, 2013 at 01:36 AM
I think I have my notes from that time period in a closet or drawer somewhere. I vaguely remember a smaller development that was proposed, but I don't recall if it was ever approved. I do recall discussions about identifying parcels that the town definitely should have pursued purchase on as open space because the risk of deveipment was just too great. I definitely remember discussing the nuebig property. I only vaguely remember talking about strong st parcel. I have a copy of the POD, it should be in there too.
Richard Poulton February 23, 2013 at 02:12 PM
Believe it or not but there was a parcel of property owned by Neubig that was sub-divided into 2 residential lots and approved some 4 / 5 years ago. But never acted on by him.
Steohen Haddon February 23, 2013 at 02:49 PM
I've always thought the neubig property is a time bomb. I'm sure you realize the extraordinary drain it would create, including the building and staffing of a new firehouse. It would be a town changing event. i found a reference to the original strong street project and it appears it was not consistent with the goals of the pod, but the pod was being written at the time. The only real thing that counts is what ended up in the plan that got filed with the state. I haven't had time to go through it........i think a trip to cabelas and dicks is on tap today along with just about virtually everybody i talked to this week LOL
Richard Poulton February 23, 2013 at 02:49 PM
Stephen, I stand somewhat corrected. Yes, the IWWC approved the Neubig plan, but the plan in front of P & Z was withdrawn by him on 3/5/2008, resubmitted at a later date, finally denied for FTA at the 9/3/2008 P & Z meeting.
Richard Poulton February 23, 2013 at 02:53 PM
Gee, and why these two stores? Loading up? LOL The Neubig property was for only two homes, not a big impact to town. But history showed it was a time bomb as you put it, just took two to do the job.
Steohen Haddon February 23, 2013 at 03:43 PM
Yup, I guess I'm one of the majority of us who in the past have chosen not to exercise one of our rights, but think we should exercise it now before we lose it. Looks like the scope of the original strong st proposal, if designed as clustered, would pass, but I think it would still may have to be slightly scaled down. the new proposal definitely is not supported by the pod, people need to understand that most of their objections, while reasonable and true, are not defensible in court the pod stopped that phony "veterans plan" on rt 80 a few months ago and may again be useful here
Patrick Madley February 23, 2013 at 10:57 PM
I am strongly opposed to this. Dino, please get in contact with me. I live in the area as well.
Richard Poulton February 24, 2013 at 02:25 PM
Just wondering if there was anything in their presentation as to why the approved project from 2007 wasn't good enough for them.
Gene Ruocco March 07, 2013 at 02:35 PM
Gene A. Ruocco Julie As of last month the Chairman is Peter Cianelli and he did a wonderful job at last nights meeting. Please correct your article.
Julie Weisberg (Editor) March 07, 2013 at 02:46 PM
Gene: Thank you for letting me know. I appreciate it. I'll pop in now and make the change. Thanks again!
Bob March 07, 2013 at 03:05 PM
Amen.Thanks to all our neighbors and concerned citizens for voicing their concerns!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »