KENT, Conn.—There was plenty of support expressed for the proposed housing development being planned for the large meadow next to Town Hall when the Planned Development District was taken before a public hearing Monday night.
But there were also concerns raised about the 80-dwelling unit plan, which would see a total of 14 multi-unit buildings erected on the northern section of the 12.5-acre parcel. Concerns ranged from the amount of traffic that would be generated, to noise and light pollution, parking, the environment and the impact on emergency services.
After more than two hours of testimony, the hearing was continued until the Planning and Zoning Commission’s April 9 regular meeting.
The project is being proposed by Kent Housing Development Associates, whose managing partner is Kent resident James Millstein. Millstein was prompted to consider developing housing after consultation with Kent Affordable Housing (KAH) President Jason Potter. Kent has a critical shortage of affordable housing available for families who wish to downsize and its workforce. There are currently 60 families on KAH’s waiting list.
Millstein told the PZC that his project would add about 16 affordable units to KAH’s current inventory of 37 apartments and townhouses. KAH is in the process of developing another site that would provide 13 more units.
“We’re committed to delivering a project that has character while meeting the town’s needs,” Millstein said.
Chris Garrity said that the 20 percent of the project that would be affordable “seems a little shy” and wondered why 20 more units, priced from $250,000 to $350,000, could not be designated for workforce housing “that a couple can afford and know they can build equity.”
“That would still leave 44 at market rate, which in Kent is between $400,000 and $500,000,” he said.
Millstein said the first intent was that the whole project would be affordable but that Kent, as a community, is too rich to qualify for the 9 percent tax credits available to developers of affordable housing. “That usually pays for 75 to 80 percent of construction,” he explained. “As a result, the affordable housing developer we talked to said he couldn’t finance it. What we have fallen back on is a project that allows market-rate sales to subsidize the affordable units.”
He noted that “affordable” rents are not cheap and rental rates actually constitute workforce housing. “We will do our best to build a great product that can at least meet the affordable requirements for 16 units,” he said. “In all likelihood the rest of the units will have to subsidize that.”
The meadow lies between the Town Hall and Maple Street. Paul Rajeckas and his wife, Julianne Dow, expressed concerns about one of the buildings being built behind their house and its interference with their enjoyment of their property. Rajeckas requested a border of trees that would screen the development and was told “we are definitely contemplating trees.”
Civil engineer Danius Virbickas noted that the height of the building is 25 feet and that it will be 50 feet from the railroad tracks behind the couple’s home.
Dow noted her sensitivity to noise and light pollution and questioned whether there would be fencing to protect animals and children from wandering onto the tracks. She was assured that, while a lighting design has yet to be developed, “dark sky” standards will be observed.
“We’ve no intention of lighting it up like a baseball field,” said architect Jeremy Lake. “It’s meant to be residential, not commercial, which would call for a higher level of lighting.”
Alexandra Morocco wondered about the effect on traffic, a concern also addressed by MaryAnn VanValkenburg. John Canning, an engineer with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., said an extensive traffic survey was done.
“We did traffic counts and project 40 trips (in and out of the development) at the busiest hour,” he said. “Our analyses found the intersections at Route 7 and Kent Green Boulevard and Maple Street and Route 7 are performing reasonably well. Any increased wait would be extended by half a second. We concluded there would not be a significant impact.”
VanValkenburg, who is chief of emergency services, said, “It looks like a very nice plan,” but commented on the traffic gridlock when tourists flock to the town in summer and fall. She asked what season the traffic studies were done.
Canning said they were done in February but were adjusted 10.5 percent for seasonality. He noted that the road that currently terminates at Town Hall will be extended to connect with Maple Street, providing another point of egress.
“Our expectation is peak fall will be much as it is,” he said.
The environmental impact of the development was also brought up. Bonnie Bevans, who expressed the belief that the project is too large, wondered what will happen to the creatures who use the field as habitat. Millstein pointed out that about half the acreage will remain in open space for the “bugs, bees and bears.”
Bevans worried about the effect on parking and Lake noted that there is one space per bedroom and onstreet designated for guest parking. At present, 162 parking spaces are proposed but Lake said more could be added if needed.
Morocco expressed hope that the buildings might support solar panels to increase energy efficiency. “We agree on this,” said Millstein, “but solar panels are now conceptual. We haven’t done the studies around sustainability, but energy costs are crazy and they are one of the costs that makes housing unaffordable.”
Former PZC member Anne McAndrew asked whether the units would be rented or sold and, if sold, what the price point would be. Millstein said that is still uncertain, but it is possible Kent Affordable Housing will manage the affordable units while the rest would be sold at market rates.
PZC member Donna Hayes noted a conflict with the affordability plan if KAH purchases the units but Potter explained he interprets the language to apply to second homes.
Hayes also asked about fencing behind Building I and II and Millstein said it would create a problem for accessing the Kent Land Trust walking trail.
This project appears to be a home run for Kent.Hopefully, after thorough studies ,it will gain approval. I’m in Washington now and wish we had a place for a project like this one.
The proposed Kent Green development, while framed as a solution to housing shortages, raises serious concerns that outweigh its benefits. An 80-unit, high-density project on a sensitive 12.5-acre meadow adjacent to Town Hall risks permanently altering one of Kent’s few remaining open landscapes, fragmenting wildlife habitat despite claims that “half” will remain preserved—a level of disruption well-documented to displace species and reduce biodiversity. The traffic study, conducted in February and adjusted only modestly, fails to convincingly address the well-known seasonal congestion that already strains Route 7 and local emergency response capacity. Moreover, with only 20% of units designated as “affordable,” the project leans heavily toward market-rate housing, undermining its stated purpose while introducing noise, light pollution, and visual intrusion for neighboring residents. A more responsible approach would prioritize development near the town transfer station, where infrastructure already exists and environmental impact would be significantly lower. Given the ecological sensitivity of the meadow, increasing climate pressures, and the long-term value of preserving open land, I am firmly opposed to any construction on this site and urge the commission to reject this proposal in favor of more sustainable, appropriately located alternatives.