Commission rejects rezoning for 140 Waterford Parkway South after split vote over traffic and infrastructure

The Waterford Zoning Commission defeated a motion to approve a zone change for 140 Waterford Parkway South, voting against a proposed map amendment that would have reclassified roughly 188.8 acres from IP‑1 General Industrial Park to a mix of IMF (industrial multifamily) and R‑40 low density residential.

Brandon Hanfield, a professional engineer for Hiantic River Consultants representing the applicant (Methon Fund 1 liquidating trustee), told the commission the revised proposal narrowed earlier plans and now shows about 98 acres changing to IMF (multifamily), 74.6 acres to R‑40 and 16.2 acres to remain IP‑1. He said the conceptual plan submitted with the application shows about 600 units, and that the IMF acreage would allow a statutory maximum of 784 units based on district density calculations; Hanfield said the reduced IMF area was a direct response to concerns raised at a March hearing.

The commission’s debate centered on traffic impacts, utility capacity and who is responsible for Waterford Parkway South. Joe Balskus, the applicant’s traffic engineer with VHB, summarized a traffic-impact statement that evaluated residential development up to 750 units and concluded the existing roadway network — including nearby I‑95 ramps — could accommodate peak-hour increases in traffic but that a detailed review by the Office of State Traffic Administration (OSTA) would be required when a site plan is submitted.

Residents and neighborhood representatives urged caution. Wayne Olsen, president of the Beachwood Estates Homeowners Association, asked the commission for specifics about IMF and R‑40 capacity and whether Waterford Parkway South would be improved to handle additional traffic. Jordan Janus, a nearby resident who said he has walked the adjacent woods for years, raised concerns about owl, hawk and turtle habitat and reminded the commission that federal law (the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918) restricts moving or removing active nests without a permit.

Commissioners voiced mixed views. Several members pressed for more detail on sewer and water capacity and on whether the town can take possession of Waterford Parkway South to make needed roadway and sidewalk improvements. Staff told the commission that the town is pursuing actions with the town attorney to formalize possession of the road so improvements can proceed if warranted. Tim Condorino said he felt the application was rushed and that important questions remained unanswered; others warned that declining to grant a zone change could leave the parcel exposed to higher‑impact industrial uses allowed as‑of‑right.

After discussion, the commission voted on a motion to approve the zone change as presented; the motion was defeated in a split vote. The applicant’s representatives said ecological surveys and traffic analyses are ongoing and that additional detail will be provided at the site‑plan stage if the applicant chooses to proceed further.

Next steps: Because the motion failed, there is no zoning amendment in effect. The applicant may revise the proposal and return to the commission, or pursue other permitted uses under the parcel’s existing IP‑1 zoning. The commission did not schedule a specific follow‑up date for this application during the meeting.

Quote highlights from the hearing include Hanfield’s summary that the plan "shows that 600 units are realistic" while noting a "maximum" of 784 based on acreage, and Jordan Janus’s public comment that "Everyone deserves a home, from humans to hawks."