Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board accepts condominium conversion application for 20 Hammond Road, defers site-plan review questions
Summary
The Milford Planning Board accepted a condominium-conversion application for 20 Hammond Road on Feb. 18 and found no potential regional impact, while directing staff to run the proposal through interdepartmental review for life-safety, parking and site-plan details.
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Milford Planning Board on Feb. 18 accepted an application to convert an existing mixed-use property at 20 Hammond Road into five condominium units and voted that the proposal has no potential regional impact.
The applicant, represented by Jim Maxton of Fieldstone Land Consultants, described the proposal: converting the two-story mixed-use building that currently houses Tokyo Joe’s martial-arts studio on the first floor and open space above into a residential unit; two residential units in a detached garage structure would be part of the condominium association; in total the conversion would create five condominium units. Maxton said the site currently uses town water but that sewer connection is planned when nearby development (Salt Creek) brings a sewer main into the neighborhood.
Board members unanimously voted to accept the application and, by motion, to determine there is no potential regional impact. Janet Langdell made the motion to accept and Susan Robinson seconded; later the motion of no potential regional impact was made and passed by roll call.
Abutters raised concerns during public comment. David Hammer of Hammer Family Realty, an abutter, asked whether the condo conversion process or the condominium documents would oblige the owner or future condo association to maintain the property — citing overgrown trees and brush that currently border his adjacent car lot — and whether commercial vehicles that currently appear on or near the site might continue to be parked there after conversion. Maxton said construction vehicles had been present while interior work proceeded and that the submitted plan shows parking and a turnaround area; he also said parking calculations meet the town’s requirements (the project provides 24 spaces where 17 would be required).
Board members and staff discussed whether the conversion should trigger interdepartmental review and whether fire and life-safety systems (sprinklers, firewall separation) have been adequately addressed. Fire separation details were raised for the garage conversion and the main house because a former breezeway had been removed. Several board members requested the project be routed through interdepartmental review (fire, building, DPW) and asked for clearer documentation of life-safety items, dumpster/trash handling, snow-storage locations and assigned parking as part of the conversion package.
The board’s vote to accept the application does not itself replace any site-plan requirements. Several board members emphasized that the condominium conversion plan will be accompanied by site-plan details where needed; the applicant was asked to return with any additional documentation requested during the interdepartmental review. The board did not approve the conversion tonight; it accepted the application and set expectations for additional technical review and documentation before final action.
