Neighbors raise safety and blasting concerns as Danbury planning commission continues Pembroke Road cluster application

The Danbury Planning Commission on Sept. 18 heard a detailed presentation on a proposed 9‑home cluster development on Pembroke Road and continued the public hearing to Oct. 16 after residents raised safety and long‑term maintenance concerns.

Benjamin Dodo, the applicant’s civil engineer, described the 5.1‑acre project for 3775 LLC as a nine‑unit cluster development with private internal access, common open space, a pool and pool house, and stormwater controls designed to reduce peak runoff. “We are reducing our drainage,” Dodo said, and noted the plan ties into existing Route 37 drainage and includes additional landscaping requested by the city’s environmental review board.

Ray Gennaro, the project’s geotechnical engineer, outlined the scope of rock excavation and proposed protections. Gennaro said the site will require substantial ledge cuts — with local cuts he estimated in places up to about 45–50 feet — and described a three‑part quality‑control approach for rock removal: pre‑blast condition surveys within a 500‑foot radius, an isolated test blast, and continuous vibration and overpressure monitoring during production blasting. “That blasting plan should be reviewed by us first prior to submission to the fire marshal,” Gennaro said, adding that third‑party vibration monitoring and annual professional inspections would be incorporated into maintenance requirements.

During public comment, Ken Gucker of 89 Piedenham Road told commissioners he experienced daily blasting impacts during construction of an earlier nearby project and reported subsequent structural and basement water problems. “I still have water problems in the basement. I have cracks in my floors,” Gucker said, urging the commission to expand monitoring beyond a 500‑foot survey radius and to require that neighbors be financially protected from any damage.

Gennaro replied that the 500‑foot radius for pre‑blast condition surveys reflects prior guidance requested by the city fire marshal and noted that seismographs are typically positioned at property lines and moved as blasting operations progress so monitoring targets structures at risk. He also said human perception of vibration is much more sensitive than levels that cause structural damage and cited industry thresholds used to avoid damage. Gennaro added the applicant will provide a maintenance plan — potentially incorporated into HOA documents — and that his firm would be available for periodic inspections.

Commissioners and staff clarified outstanding reviews that must be received before a decision: city engineering, the fire marshal (including blasting permit review), and the health department. Staff also noted the wetlands commission had approved regulated activities and asked for additional landscape and phasing details, which the applicant agreed to provide.

The hearing remains open. The commission voted to continue the public hearing to Oct. 16, 2024, so pending departmental comments and requested revisions can be filed and considered.

What’s next: The applicant will supply revised materials and responses to outstanding department comments (engineering, fire marshal, health), and the Planning Commission will reconvene the public hearing on Oct. 16, 2024.