Neighbors raise driveway and screening concerns as commission continues Barnum Road daycare expansion hearing

The Danbury Planning Commission on Aug. 7 heard a detailed presentation on Barnum Real Estate LLC’s application to expand Cedar Gables daycare at 15 Barnum Road but continued the public hearing to Aug. 21 to allow outstanding staff reports to arrive, including the fire marshal’s review.

Attorney Neil Marcus told commissioners the property has long been used as a daycare and said the applicant obtained variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals that allow the facility to continue to operate on a private well and septic system as a preexisting nonconforming use. "The property will qualify for some state grants to improve the number of spaces available in the state for the services that are provided by the day care," Marcus said.

Engineer Steve Sullivan of CCA presented the site plan. He said the 1.12‑acre RA‑40 property would see widened access and reconfigured parking and drainage; the redesign includes a widened 24‑foot driveway for two‑way travel to the rear, additional parking behind the building, play‑area fencing, a new code‑complying septic layout (B100A) submitted to the health department, and a proposed maximum capacity of 71 children. Sullivan said the design included stormwater management and a refuse area and that planning and engineering comments are being addressed.

Doug Kennedy, an owner-operator of Cedar Gables, said the reconfigured main-level drop-off would speed throughput and reduce queuing by allowing quick drop-offs at the front entrance and parking in the rear for longer visits. "It cuts it in half, essentially," Kennedy said of the expected drop-off time.

Neighbor Marie Valera, a resident at 17 Barnum Road, said the proposed widened driveway and its turning radius would come within inches of her driveway and asked what type of fencing would be installed. Sullivan pointed to the plan, said the contractor would install a solid 6‑foot fence up to the vicinity of a 30‑inch maple tree at the property edge, and said runoff would be directed into the proposed drainage system, not onto the neighbor’s property. Staff confirmed the traffic-engineer report had been submitted and signed off; the fire marshal’s review remained outstanding.

A motion to continue the public hearing was made, seconded and approved; the hearing was continued to the commission’s Aug. 21 meeting to allow for the remaining reports and revised materials to be submitted and reviewed.

Procedural next steps: applicant will submit outstanding staff-requested materials (including fire marshal and any remaining staff revisions); the commission will resume the hearing on Aug. 21.