Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Affordability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors press traffic concerns as Danbury panel advances hotel-to-apartment conversion; staff reports cite no deal-breakers
Summary
The Planning Commission closed the public hearing on Bridal Ravens IS Danbury LLC’s hotel-to-apartment conversion at 18 Old Ridgebury Road after engineers said the project would produce modest queuing (about two cars) at the site driveway; neighbors and a city council member raised safety and private-road access concerns and commissioners signaled general support, citing an affordability plan and staff signoffs.
The Danbury Planning Commission heard technical traffic testimony and neighborhood objections on May 7 before closing the public hearing and moving the Bridal Ravens IS Danbury LLC hotel‑to‑apartment conversion to old business for further action.
Traffic consultant Joe Balskus told the commission his capacity analysis shows modest queuing on the site driveway under normal peak conditions — "about 2 cars, maybe 3 cars tops" — and that the conversion would generate a small peak‑hour increase compared with the formerly operating hotel but a net daily reduction in some trip metrics. Balskus said the majority of new trips would likely use I‑84 ramps rather than local side streets.
Multiple residents, including a Larson Drive neighbor, and City Council member Ben Chernazy said they do not share the traffic study’s conclusions. A Larson Drive resident asked how the study could show minimal local impact when, she said, the proposal would yield "200 apartments and a restaurant." Council member Ben Chernazy raised safety concerns tied to the downhill approach on Old Ridgebury Road and questioned assumptions that private roads such as Milestone/Reserve would be available as cut‑through routes.
An applicant representative argued the traffic assessment is a relative comparison to what the property could generate as an operating hotel and said the conversion would deliver housing — including affordable units under an agreed affordability plan — while staff reports raised only minor comments. Planning staff confirmed the traffic engineer (Vera) signed off on the plan and that engineering, fire and planning reports contained no deal‑breaking items.
Commissioners generally expressed support for moving the matter forward, citing the project’s long vetting process and the need for housing in Danbury, but several said they understood neighbors’ concerns about queuing and private‑road access. The commission closed the public hearing and moved the application (special exception No. 804) to item 2 under old business; a final staff report and further administrative follow-up were requested prior to a decision.
The public hearing record includes neighbor testimony and council input on traffic and safety; the commission’s decision to move the matter does not constitute final approval.
