Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the General Plan Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council Rejects Proposed Density Increase at 2410 Hinkley Drive, Citing Pending General‑Plan Update
Summary
The council voted to deny Resolution 06‑2026 to change the general plan map for ~7 acres at 2410 Hinkley Drive from 12 to 24 units per acre, citing an ongoing citywide general‑plan update and raised concerns about infrastructure and water use.
The West Haven City Council voted Feb. 4 to deny a proposed general‑plan amendment for roughly 7 acres at 2410 Hinkley Drive that would have increased allowable multifamily density from 12 units per acre to 24.
Community Director Steven Nelson explained the request and said the R‑3 zoning in West Haven defers density controls to the general‑plan map, so the applicant must first secure a map amendment before a rezoning. Nelson said staff and utility districts had been notified and, while infrastructure upgrades would likely be required, utilities generally indicated they could serve the site with improvements. He also said UDOT raised access concerns for Hinkley (a UDOT roadway) that remain subject to UDOT approval.
Nelson told the council the city is conducting a comprehensive general‑plan update to be considered this summer and that the planning commission recommended denial largely because the broader map is under revision. “We did hold a public hearing on December 10,” Nelson said, “the biggest concerns that were brought up during that public hearing was higher density…and significant impact on water usage.” Residents who spoke at the planning commission raised affordability and water‑use concerns.
Councilmember (motion maker) moved to deny Resolution 06‑2026, finding the proposal inconsistent with the general plan and noting the pending citywide update; the motion was seconded and passed on roll call.
The denial is procedural and legislative: it prevents the applicant from moving forward to a rezone that would be required to change entitlements. Staff emphasized that even if the council had approved the map change, further approvals — including a zone change and UDOT access approvals — would still be required before development could proceed.
Next steps: the applicant may wait for the comprehensive general‑plan update this summer or pursue other options; the council did not provide additional direction beyond the denial.
