Commission approves 44‑unit 8‑30g development at 843 North Street with conditions

The Milford Planning and Zoning Commission voted to approve a site plan for a 44‑unit residential development at 843 North Street under Connecticut General Statutes 8‑30g, subject to conditions enumerated in the city engineer’s April 11, 2025 memorandum and the relocation of a fire hydrant from a snow‑storage area.

Thomas Lynch, attorney for the applicant 8 43 North LLC, said the proposal would construct 44 two‑bedroom units in 17 buildings on a roughly two‑acre parcel in the city’s North End. “Under the terms of section 8 30 g of our statutes, 30% of the units or 14 units will be set aside for rent to individuals who either meet 60% of the state median income or 80% of the state median income,” Lynch said. He also said an affordability plan describing marketing and rent calculations was included in the application materials.

Ronald Wismer, the project engineer, described site layout, utilities and stormwater design. He said the storm drainage system is designed for a 100‑year storm (8.4 inches of rainfall) at the city engineer’s request; typical Milford requirements use a 25‑year standard (about 6.5 inches). Wismer said the development provides two parking spaces per unit (one in a garage and one in front of each unit) and 12 electric vehicle charging stations located in guest parking areas.

Kermit Hua, the traffic engineer, summarized new traffic counts collected in January 2025 and explained seasonal adjustments and a growth factor the team used for a 2028 background condition. Hua reported the proposed 44 units would generate about 21 weekday morning peak‑hour trips and about 25 trips during midday and afternoon peak hours; his analysis and a third‑party review by John P. Thompson, PE, found the adjacent intersections and the proposed driveways would operate at acceptable levels of service (A or B) with no predicted safety hazards.

The project was modified during prior inland wetlands review: a proposed clubhouse was removed, the number of access drives was reduced to two (one to North Street and one to Kozlowski Drive) and a building in the northeast corner was eliminated to preserve trees closest to off‑site wetlands. The plans include passive open space; no dedicated on‑site playground area is shown, and staff noted nearby Eisenhower Park across North Street serves recreational needs.

Public commenters spoke in favor of the project’s affordable housing component and access to Eisenhower Park. Jesse Williams, a local resident, said the town should share the park amenity with more families; Therese Eek described the project as a step toward preserving housing options for residents on limited incomes.

At the close of the public hearing, Commissioner Mortimer moved to approve the application with the city engineer’s conditions (items a–f, City Engineering Review, April 11, 2025) and to require relocation of a fire hydrant from a snow‑storage area; Commissioner Collegian seconded the motion. A roll call recorded votes against by Commissioners Agnes, Anderson and Zahardis; Commissioners Hirsch, Collegian, Macchio, Mortimer and Satti voted in favor. The motion passed.

Discussion vs. decision: the record shows extensive technical review (inland wetlands permit, third‑party traffic review, fire marshal and sewer commission signoffs) and the imposition of engineering and recordation conditions as part of the approval. The commission’s action authorizes site plan approval subject to those conditions; the developer must still obtain building permits and satisfy recording/operation and maintenance obligations for the stormwater system.